Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Domains

Domain: computerprivacy.org

Stories and comments across the archive that link to computerprivacy.org.

Comments · 3

  1. Re:P3 667? by Alsee · · Score: 1 · on IBM Shipping More PCs with Trust Chips

    Yeah, the Pentium II had the CPU ID number. And if you read some old Intel speeches they had planned to start rolling Trust functionality into CPU's in 2002. The outrage and backlash against CPUID derailed their plans.

    So Intel founded a lobbying group Americans for Computer Privacy (ACP) and invited others in the industry to join. According to Intel's own speech ACP is lobbying to RELAX government regulations. The new Trusted Computing system has a huge focus on pro-privacy spin. While every Trust Chip (or CPU, if it's in the CPU) will have a unique ID code, there are features in the system that CAN be used by software if specifically wants to protect privacy. There are certain systems in there that CAN be used to make you semi-anonymous. But those features are entirely optional, up to the software to choose to use them.

    What about software or website or whatever that do want your identity and want to violate your privacy? Well the Trusted Computing Group's own FAQ says it best:

    What has the TCG done to preserve privacy?
    TCG believes that privacy is a necessary element of a trusted system. The system owner has ultimate control and permissions over private information and must "opt-in" to utilize the TCG subsystem.

    MUST OPT-IN to utilize the Trust system. If something or someone wants to see your unique ID code, if someone or something asks for unlimited permission to violate your privacy, if you do not "opt-in", then the Trust system refuses to work at all. The software will not install or run. The website will be unviewable. The music or other file will be unusable. You will be denied a network connection.

    Wasn't this supposed to cause the sky to fall in 1999 or something?

    Thier plan was derailed. But if the new plan goes forward then somewhere around 2008 or 2009 you may beforced to "opt-in" or be denied any access to the internet at all. At a Global Tech summit the President's cyber security advisor asked ISP's to plan to make it a mandatory part of their terms of service. That they should do it to fight viruses and to protect the National Information Infrastructure, to defend against Terrorist cyber attack. And get this - he literally called on them to do it to defend against Osama bin Laden himself.

    So yes, in a few years the sky really could fall.

    -

  2. Here's where to find more good info on the bill by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0 · on New Encryption Bill in House

    If you check out our archive at computerprivacy.org you can listen/read/watch the testimony from the hearing this bill (HR850) had on March 4th.

  3. Security & Freedom Through Encryption Act Hearing by BRT · · Score: 1 · on Clueful Crypto Legislation
    We've just put up the complete cybercast of the March 4, 1999 hearing on the SAFE act (HR850) which would allow more encryption products to be exported from the United States and restrict the government from mandating "backdoor access" to your private communications. You listen/watch/read testimony at:

    http://www.computerprivacy.org/archive/03041999/

    or click here

    In particular, note how the witness from the National Security Agency, Barbara McNamara, tries to argue conflicting points at various points in her testimony:

    . Good encryption isn't available abroad, but

    . at least some is, since most foreign governments use it, but

    . it isn't very good, and therefore

    . we still think export controls are working.

    ACP Webmaster

    webmaster@computerprivacy.org