On Sat, 4 Apr 2020 14:22:11 -0400, "Mayayana" 
declaimed the following:

>
>    From what I've found it sounds like ARM is not
>considered secure enough for DRM. If I'd known
>it would have this [apparently unfixable] problem
>I wouldn't have bought it.
>

 ARM, or R-Pi?

 ARM (the company) licenses processor architecture/designs, but the
licensed company is responsible for adding in other features. The R-Pi SoC
originated, as I recall, as a cell phone core.

 There are ARM SoCs that incorporate things like hardware AES and other
encryption, secure boot capability
http://infocenter.arm.com/help/index.jsp?topic=/com.arm.doc.prd29-genc-009492c/
CACGCHFE.html
and other such features... But those SoCs tend to be more expensive (and
activating secure boot can be a one-time action, not conducive to a system
running Linux wherein much of the boot logic can change from version to
version, and the file system is writable).

 For DRM, the lack is likely that the R-Pi does not have hardware
encryption (software can be hacked), and may also be too slow for streaming
data (especially as the foundation hasn't yet released a 64-bit OS -- while
64-bit may add some overhead for routine programs, software DRM/encryption
may gain from having full 64-bit operations rather than having to split
stuff into 32-bit halves).
.


--
 Wulfraed                 Dennis Lee Bieber         AF6VN
 wlfraed@ix.netcom.com    http://wlfraed.microdiversity.freeddns.org/

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05