On Jan 3, 2008, at 7:38 PM, Peter Gutmann wrote:
http://www.intersil.com/cda/deviceinfo/0,1477,ISL6296,0.html
At $1.40 each (at least in sub-1K quantities) you wonder whether
it's costing
them more to add the DRM (spread over all battery sales) than any
marginal
gain in preventing use of third-party batteries by a small subset
of users.
Assuming that is your threat model, yes.
If your threat is that you're worried about a cheap battery flaming
in your brand of phone, that's more of a threat.
People who know how to make batteries have a so-so track record with
them. There have been many cases of off-brand batteries going into
overload.
If I were the CSO of a mobile phone company, I think I could
convincingly argue that this is a public safety issue. Let's face it,
if a battery takes out someone's leg or downs an airliner, the
headline will say my company's name, not the people who made the
battery.
If I really wanted openness, I could come up with an accreditation
process that allow responsible third parties who followed proper
quality standards to license the needed hashes.
Jon
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
