From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.44.254]) by listman.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3D933EC3C for ; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 23:42:29 -0500 (EST) Received: from mail.redhat.com (mail.redhat.com [199.183.24.239]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id fAK4gTp26307 for ; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 23:42:29 -0500 Received: (from mail@localhost) by mail.redhat.com (8.11.0/8.8.7) id fAK4gTg01391 for blinux-list@listman.redhat.com; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 23:42:29 -0500 Received: from mail2.netacc.net (mail2.netacc.net [208.34.108.27]) by mail.redhat.com (8.11.0/8.8.7) with ESMTP id fAK4gTw01387 for ; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 23:42:29 -0500 Received: from bharding (algoma-host32.doorpi.net [12.37.10.37]) by mail2.netacc.net (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id fAK4gRP28341 for ; Mon, 19 Nov 2001 23:42:27 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20011119224546.0081c520@mail.doorpi.net> X-Sender: bharding@mail.doorpi.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 22:45:46 -0600 To: blinux-list@redhat.com From: Brent Harding Subject: Re: Digital Talking Book Standard In-Reply-To: <20011119113136.B8371@dalek.dhs.org> References: <3.0.6.32.20011119110639.00a9f100@mail.doorpi.net> <200111191500.fAJF0Qa69940@dc.cis.okstate.edu> <3.0.6.32.20011119110639.00a9f100@mail.doorpi.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Loop: blinux-list@redhat.com Sender: blinux-list-admin@redhat.com Errors-To: blinux-list-admin@redhat.com X-BeenThere: blinux-list@redhat.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.1 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: blinux-list@redhat.com List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Linux for blind general discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Free software is the best, but with this type of thing, there's little benefit to us to want the problems fixed. It's the publishers that want all this security, not the people using the content, but in almost every other situation, everyone hates the holes. At 11:31 AM 11/19/01 -0600, you wrote: >On Mon, Nov 19, 2001 at 11:06:39AM -0600, Brent Harding wrote: >> I don't think the drm will work in the long run. It has to be proprietary >> to not allow hacking, anyone who has the source code can hack a program to >> undo what the original did. > >Anything (proprietary or not) can be hacked, given enough time and >skill. This has to be the worst argument for proprietary software I've >seen. As I've seen written somewhere...security by obscurity is no >security at all. What does a proprietary security system have that a >free one doesn't have? Well, let's see. No checks against sloppy >programming. Look at the deal with Adobe's Ebook format; that Russian >fellow found a way to get into it, gave a talk about it, and was >arrested, jailed, and is now on trial for copyright infringement. Did >he actually infringe anyone's copyright? Did he actually steal >anyone's work? No, he pointed out a security flaw and told someone how >it could be exploited. Rather than being glad of the feedback so the >problem could be fixed, Adobe sent the feds after him! That isn't >security. Now if these guys had used a free standard, any security >holes could be found and addressed. It's a much better deal for >everyone. And eventually (I say eventually because human beings are >pretty stupid about things sometimes), people who should already know >better but don't will see that free software really is good for all of >us. I firmly believe that that is where our future lies. >-- >Buddy Brannan, KB5ELV | From the pines down to the projects, >Email: davros@ycardz.com | Life pushes up through the cracks. >Phone: (972) 276-6360 | And it's only going forward, >ICQ: 36621210 | And it's never going back.--Small Potatoes > > > >_______________________________________________ >Blinux-list mailing list >Blinux-list@redhat.com >https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/blinux-list > >