Slashdot Mirror
Stopping Palladium?
jbwiv asks: "I've seen many articles/posts/opinions stating that Microsoft's Palladium could put an end to Open Source as we know it, thereby stealing away most of what I enjoy and appreciate about computers. With the big two (Intel, AMD) actively developing Palladium architectures, I'd like to get involved in the effort to combat it. However, I haven't found any person or group actively working to stop Palladium; plenty people are bitching, but no one seems to be doing much about it. Who can one contact regarding this, and are there any groups already involved? What other steps might be taken? It would seem that such an affront to our way of life would be met with more vocal and mobile opposition."
Buy a Mac, Sun, etc? I'd imagine those architectures won't be instating Palladium.
Or am I going to have to go back to my handy-dandy etch-a-sketch?
PS: I don't reply to ACs.
And here's a recent Slashdot article:
Sun Releases Open Source Tool for Project Liberty
First useful post?
-- Argel
There has been alot of talk on this subject, almost all of it speculation. Do we have any concrete ideas about how it will stop open source? No we don't. We can only speculate (be like the x-box, secure hw, closed specifications). Short version, know thie enemy. We don't even know if it is the enemy.
Doesn't Palladium meet my needs? Doesn't Palladium have a place?
Unlike the CBDTPA, DMCA, UCITA, and other laws, we can't lobby against Palladium. We can't (and shouldn't!) lobby to have it banned at the federal level. It's a Microsoft product. If they want to make it, they will.
All you can do is not buy it, and exercise your free speech to try to convince as many other people as possible to not buy into either.
What more is there to do? Am I missing something?
If you're looking for action to take, lobby against the CBDTPA, let your representatives know how you feel on these issues, and focus on the legal problems. Microsoft is perfectly free to offer Palladium if they want to, because as sucky as it is, it's not actually being mandated by law. (Yet. Re: CBDTPA, lest ye hurry to accuse me of paranoia.) Palladium is going to happen. (Since the first incarnation will be horrid, it may not even be worth worrying about; the market may well write it out of existance.)
...how one day you people rail against the RIAA's attempts to shut down P2P, claiming that P2P has other uses than intellectual property theft. On the very same day, and quite often in the same thread, you can argue that Palladium is "evil" and it must die, regardless of the other uses of the technology to secure systems against unauthorized software such as viruses, worms and trojans. You have absolutely no concept what Palladium is but you have no problems condemning the technology. Either make up your mind of STFU. Enough of the hypocrisy.
Repeat after me : We will not win a lobbying/PR war. period.
So let them (Microsoft, Intel, AMD, RIAA, MPAA) try to please Hollywood : if Joe User has a true alternative to the annoyances of Palladium, he will switch in no time.
What about
- GNU/Linux instead of Palladium Windows
- A PowerPC G4 based PC instead of a Palladium Intel/AMD based one
- ogg/mp3 and divx instead of Palladium cds and dvds
- P2P instead of Palladium Amazon
Yes, Joe User prefers Windows/Intel/DVD/Amazon for now. But the choice will be very different when he will be annoyed by palladium every time he wants to listen to music or watch a movie.
Just be patient : they're working for us. And in the meantime, you can help to improve the alternative (hint, hint.)
Obligatory disclaimer : I'm not advocating the use of P2P as a means of avoiding buying music/movies. I'm just saying that if Hollywood impose unfair licencing terms, Joe User will switch to P2P, be it legal or not.
It only matters if people support it. For instance, I download most of my music from video game fan sites. Are those composers going to suddenly start producing music using palladium technologies? It's a possibility. But if they don't, then I still get to play the music. So don't support anyone who uses Palladium as a means to protect their copyright.
Ok, is Palladium bad? Probably if Microsoft has something to do with it. Can Linux use this tech for good? Is it a Windows only tech? Where are the factions that don't want Windows to rule all of the media? What does IBM think? Sun?
Can this really fight viruses and worms?
The real question is how can I use this to my advantage? What can we do to make this do something useful instead of merely lock up all the media in the world?
-WolfWithoutAClause
"Gravity is only a theory, not a fact!"This is the method that the opposition will try:
1) Make some CPUs implement opt-in DRM
2) Make all CPUs implement opt-in DRM
3) Make some CPUs implement opt-out DRM
4) Make all CPUs implement opt-out DRM
5) Make some CPUs implement mandatory DRM
6) Make all CPUs implement mandatory DRM
We have to fight at every step. The key to fighting during the "some" steps will be economic and technical (early adopters must be punished) and the key to avoiding the all steps will be political.
I believe that our best opportunity is during step one. We need to be prepared to make END USERS who accept DRM suffer. This may be somewhat unnatural for us to do, but if we do that, the market will take care of the rest.
Here are a couple of ideas:
A) Open source licences should actively exclude installation on DRM *capable* hardware.
B) Open source tools must inhibit interoperability with DRM enabled hardware. "I'm sorry, but your machine does not meet the minimum requirements to view this web page"
C) At work, try to influence procurement policy:
- "DRM is for playing games and watching movies, do we really want our employees doing that?"
- "Some software breaks when you use that - let's keep our options open"
- "Palladium will worsen our lock-in to MS products, do we want that?"
- "When somebody cracks it, and they will, we'll get viruses we can't remove"
Does the moderator really consider this /."?
a flamebait, or does it mean "this will
effectively be a flamebait, although it
certainly is a legitimate statement inviting
thoughtful discourse anywhere but
Considered harmful.
As background material, consider Microsoft in general: Windows XP Shows the Direction Microsoft is Going.
My knee-jerk reaction to Palladium has always been the same as your average /.'er: bitter hatred towards M$ and their stupid attempts to run your computer, control your life, and ultimately own your soul (I swear that clause is in the EULA somewhere). However, once I thought about it some more, I realized that this may end being a huge blessing in disguise.
When it comes down to it, you can lump home computer users into 3 categories: Mac users, Windows users, and Linux users. (Yes I know there are others like *BSD, but these form the 3 of significant numbers). Look at how M$'s implementation of Palladium will affect each of these three groups:
Windows users: They will be subject to the computer hell that Palladium has been predicted to be. Frankly, I have no sympathy for these people because they chose to run Windows in the first place.
Linux users: When the new chips first come out, it may take a little longer to get the kernel working on the new hardware, but it will get done (a la XBox). Do you honestly think a kernel hacker is going to go out of his way to make sure that the kernel tells the hardware you are playing an mp3? Hell no. So maybe it's a minor inconvenience at the start, but business as usual in the long run.
Mac users: We are going to be laughing at Windows users like we always have. Apple has ALWAYS put the users' needs as its top priority. Jobs has spoken about before about how people shouldn't be taking away the legal rights of users by taking away technology that COULD possibly be used illegally.
In the end, I see this boosting both Mac and Linux marketshares. You can only screw people so long before they get tired of it, and I think this will hopefully be the step to knock a healthy chunk out of M$'s marketshare. If Apple and Linux gain more users, the developers will inevitably follow. No longer would we have to whine about the games that are only out on Windows. No longer would we have to search for software that there are not necessarily good ports or quality alternatives for.
If the parent or employer can change the key, then so can the children or employees. If physical tampering is not a problem, then existing access control mechanisms are fine. If physical tampering is a problem, Palladium will not help. The "content producers" are the only ones seeing a benefit from Palladium, and the only ones that physical tampering will not easily defeat.
Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
:start
;
Lack of consumer demand creates lack of money. Lack of money creates lack of development. Lack of development creates lack of production. Lack of production creates lack of product. Lack of product creates lack of intrest. Lack of intrest creates lack of consumer demand.
;
GOTO start
If you really want to fight it, the simplest way to go about it is to get it known on the net to Joe User. If enough people are aware of the scheme that MS, Intel, and AMD are planning, people will not want to purchase it, and will even make a concious effort to make sure that thier new computers do not come with this so-called "enhancement".
When the big three realize that there is no customer base for a product like this, production of Pallidium will cease.
Get your free Dropbox account with 2 GB Free storage!
Maybe it's good to let Palladium come around. Lots of dissatisfied customers will complain and not buy new hardware for a long time. Hopefully Microsoft will then lose some of its arrogance and start acting normally.
-- Cheers!
Perhaps...
really its the DRM aspects that are offensive...
This initive wopuld prevently me from making copies of the music I own...that I find offensive...
Power Corrupts,Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely, leaving one person(group)in charge is absolutely corrupt.
Given Microsoft's abysmal record on security, I wouldn't place my bets on either being done effectively. After all, it was a Microsoft executive that admitted what we all know: Security is an afterthought at Microsoft.
I don't know about you, but every time someone comes out with hardware or software to "protect" me, it ends up making it harder for me to do perfectly legal things.
I can't believe that Microsoft is capable of making anything secure that won't be hacked in days, if not hours, of hitting the street. Palladium may increase that time, but as with all forms of "copy-protection" and other hassles, it will only prevent casual violators, not the dedicated ones.
You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
How bad is it that in the palladium future, open source software won't be able to use palladium 'enhanced' content?
I personally haven't purchased any new media content in about a year, and thats not because I've been stealing it, its because I'm happy enough with what I have. Palladium won't make my cds break, or my dreamcast stop running, or stop the games in debian from being as fun as they are now.
What is the big deal?
Need a Catering Connection
...here's a quick rundown on what I think is Microsoft's strategy with Palladium: it's quite beautiful actually in its cunning, and it's going to be difficult to formulate a solid response to it. It has absolutely nothing to do with stopping Open Source software from running on PCs, as this would be blatantly anti-competitive and PC manufacturers would run away screaming from it. It's more subtle than that. Instead, it is all about the age-old Microsoft tradition of decommoditization of formats and protocols that we learnt so much about from the 1998 Halloween documents, taking this low-ethics strategy one step further.
Media companies have known as long as almost any of us that the public at large want downloadable digital media - music, films, TV-on-demand. With the growth of broadband and PC ownership this has now become impossible for them to ignore. However, the explosion of P2P networks has also shown Big Media that without effective copy-protection, their content is soon available to anyone and everyone that wants it, without paying them. The media companies see this as a threat, as they think it will cut into their bottom line. From their point of view I think that's a reasonable assumption to make. It doesn't matter whether or not you agree with this or whether this is in fact the truth: the truth is irrelevant. The only thing that matters here is how the media companies see it, because they are the ones with almost all the content the public wants, and they have very deep pockets.
We've already seen the media companies and their surrogates make attempts at addressing this perceived threat on their own: witness PressPlay, LiquidAudio, SDMI, several CD copy-protection mechanisms and all sorts of other schemes. The trouble is that the media industry is still fairly clueless about the Internet and its users, and lacks the clout to force these schemes on the public, so all of them have so far fallen flat on their face, or have been cracked in no time at all, reducing their copy-protection effectiveness to zero.
Enter Microsoft and Palladium. Palladium is, in essence, a system which allows Microsoft to verify, through the use of hardware-assisted and hardened strong cryptography, that the PC that Windows is running on does not have any peculiar software or hardware attached that could divert and record an unencrypted digital signal - that is, the PC has a secure, verifiable digital path.
This is how it works: Each PC has a unique public/private keypair stored on the processor itself, in addition to Microsoft's public key. When Palladium is enabled, the hardware will refuse to run an operating system that is not signed by Microsoft's private key, and then the operating system will refuse to load hardware drivers that have not also been signed by Microsoft, effectively removing any possibility for diverting the unencrypted digital stream. When you download Palladium-protected content, it is encrypted using the client machine's unique public key, so it will only play back on the machine with the corresponding private key. Your access to the content is completely dictated by Microsoft, and because of the verifiable software and hardware in the client machine, there's precisely nothing you can do about it - at least, barring Microsoft's usual quota of bugs, but expect Microsoft to be quite meticulous here. You'll almost certainly always be able to turn Palladium off, but then you won't be able to play Palladium-protected content - you won't have access to the private key stored on the CPU that can decrypt the content. It absolutely will not stop you from listening or watching to unencrypted content, not on its own, anyway, and Microsoft is too smart to cut off its own air supply.
Microsoft can do this when the media companies failed because they have such total dominance over the whole client PC market and its architecture. Witness how they have already got Intel and AMD onboard to do the hardware side of things. Much of the software required to do this is already in Windows: driver signing, for instance, has been there since Windows 2000, although optional, and encrypted digital rights management has been in Windows Media Player for some time now too. It's plain Microsoft has been planning this for a while and has been doing the whole 'How to boil a frog' thing - i.e., slowly, bit-by-bit, all the time spinning it their own way.
The media companies will love it: finally they get their secure digital path and can start distributing all their content over the internet, whilst screwing the public out of their fair use rights. No new laws have had to be paid for, although the DMCA and similar laws worldwide will help keep attempted cracking of the system to a minimum. They can gradually start phasing out CDs so that, in ten years time, Palladium-protected content is the only digital content you can get.
Microsoft loves it because it gives them total control over the whole PC - they can dictate to hardware manufacturers exactly what they can and cannot produce, because if they don't listen, they don't get their drivers signed and the hardware won't run with Windows.
Once they have a good lead in the amount of content produced for Windows Media/Palladium systems, it gives them an enormous amount of leverage in consumer media products: music players, TV, cable, you name it. Everything media-related will be subject to Microsoft's whims, because without Microsoft's approval, your hardware won't be able to play any content.
It gives them complete control over what will probably eventually be the media industry's main form of distribution, which will earn them billions. Better still, with downloadable digital content becoming more and more important, it will be a major body-blow to Linux and Open Source - Microsoft will never sign a Linux distribution's kernel so that it can run in Palladium mode, so Palladium-protected content will never ever play in Linux. This will put an enormous dent in Linux's chances as an OS for the desktop - none of the media industry's output will play, and as CD/DVD supply gradually dries up over time, it will put Linux on the retreat back into its server homeland.
You can bet that eventually Apple will cave in too, assuming Windows Media protected by Palladium becomes dominant. They simply won't have any choice but to side with Microsoft and implement Palladium, because otherwise the supply of available content will dry up, unless there's a revolution in independent, free media. Mac-heads should get on board the anti-Palladium train now, because if you don't, Apple will be just as vulnerable to Microsoft as the rest of us. You simply don't have the desktop share to matter on your own, unfortunately, but together we might.
It is a domesday scenario for desktop Linux, and pretty ugly for consumer electronics manufacturers, PC peripheral manufacturers, Apple and other non-PC hardware makers, not forgetting of course the public at large. What can be done?
Well, there's six things that I can think off the top of my head:
I don't think the war is lost yet, but we need to start fighting. Microsoft has come up with a spectacularly shrewd bit of corporate strategy, and we need an equally good response - very soon.
The only thing to do that has a chance of working, is to fight the media companies that are going to release stuff that will require Palladium. That means stop buying MPAA and RIAA stuff. That way, when all MPAA DVD-NG release movies aren't playable on non-Palladium or Palladium-disabled machines, then you will only be locked out of n% of the market instead of 90%.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
no no no- he meant to *buy* amd, not just one of their processors. if we all pool our allowances, we can buy the company and change policy- from the top!
(heh)
Working toward a usable PDA environment in the spirit of Newton OS: Dynapad
Really what else is there? I feel like the Subject Line Troll some days.
sulli
RTFJ.
...is still available. :)
What about software? With Palladium Microsoft is not only killing open/free software but also everything you can find at Tucows. That's gonna drive people to the Macintosh in droves.
This simply will not last. It may be like the 55mph speed limit, which took about 10 years too long to repeal, but eventually the people will get real tired of paying $15 a month here, $10 a month there, for services (like voicemail or video on demand) that replaced what they used to own outright (like answering machines or VCRs) in the good old days of the DRM-free 20th Century.
Palladium's just a symptom of a much larger disease, and eventually the public will give up on asprin and go for surgery. Or maybe just put the patient down and go back to books.
If all this should have a reason, we would be the last to know.
Microsoft will stop this by only allowing "authorized programs" to run.
That's not Palladium; that's Xbox. Microsoft, in its its Palladium Initiative Technical FAQ, shows no intention of releasing a Microsoft Windows OS for PCs that prevents any application that doesn't load palladium.dll from running.
Well, frankly, nobody knows exactly, Microsoft won't tell us much about it.
Then read the Palladium Technical FAQ.
Will I retire or break 10K?
Now they're going to add a TON of code whose whole purpose is to make the PC NOT work under certain circumstances.
Palladium doesn't take anything away that you already have. Palladium conforming systems MUST allow the user to temporarily disable Palladium hardware in BIOS configuration, and Windows will still boot, just without Palladium support.
when the PC is booting under Palladium, the PC is trying NOT to load its device drivers and other critical OS components, under certain circumstances.
Palladium won't make untrusted drivers Not Load; it'll only make untrusted drivers Not Load With Palladium Privileges. Apps such as Winamp that don't use Palladium features will not be affected at all. Frankly, the Windows OS won't be able to tell the difference between Winamp and the MPEG or Ogg background music in several video games, and Microsoft doesn't want to kill video games because games are Windows's biggest edge over BSD and GNU/Linux operating systems.
The only thing Palladium will do in connection with digital restrictions management is this: it will provide an infrastructure for publishers to make copies of works available for rental. If an independent publisher wants to make copies available for sale or for free download, then the publisher can just choose not to lock the document.
Will I retire or break 10K?
The processor WILL NOT RUN UNSIGNED CODE IN RING 0.
Unless you go to BIOS and turn off Palladium. Microsoft's Palladium specification requires hardware vendors to provide that option. However, you lose all Palladium hardware features until you power-cycle the system.
Now guess where the Linux kernel has to run? Yup. Ring 0.
Not necessarily. It could be running in a virtualized sandbox. This happens, for example, in User Mode Linux (which runs in ring 3) and in Linux for PlayStation 2 (which doesn't allow direct hardware access to the chipset).
Will I retire or break 10K?
Comment removed based on user account deletion