At 16:38 +1300 04.01.2008, Peter Gutmann wrote:
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.
I don't think I agree with the "DRM for batteries" characterization. It's not my data in that battery that they're preventing me from getting at.
Given that illicit replica batteries can have particularly mediagenic failure modes, I posit that manufacturers are increasingly motivated to make sure that if the battery says NameBrand on it, it actually is a NameBrand battery. Counterfeit failures lead to brand damage and other unpleasant economic side-effects.
Not that real NameBrand batteries don't ever behave badly, but this type of countermeasure should also provide legitimate manufacturers with additional incentive not to screw up. Which is actually to the end users' benefit.
s. --------------------------------------------------------------------- The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
