Slashdot Mirror
Transmeta to Incorporate DRM in TM5800 Processor
smiff writes "Silicon Valley is reporting that Transmeta will embed 'security' features in its TM5800 Crusoe processor. 'Transmeta said its Crusoe processors...would be slightly altered to tackle security and address requirements for securing sensitive data and intellectual property.' With everyone looking out for security, why don't I feel all warm and fuzzy inside?"
Why does this kind of stuff happen right in front of our eyes, yet behind our backs?
With everyone looking out for security, why don't I feel all warm and fuzzy inside?
Because it is not security for you, but security from you.
DRM seems to be more DRRM: Digital Rights Removal Mechanism.
I don't subscribe to RMS's GNUtopian vision.
Personally, I think the whole DRM thing is just FUD. There are so many agendas at work, the true nature of it is only known to the designers at work. And knowing how hardware architects work, I don't think theres much to fear.
-
Perhaps this is the time when we should take into consideration buying processors from the Chinese government (since they're making them now). I realize they may be slow, but if this DRM thing gets out of hand this sort of threat to the US chipmakers could be in order.
"Evil thrives when Good Men do nothing"
Of course I forgot who said that....
I definately would feel challenged if other people start storing certificates and keys on my computer without allowing me access to them.
You're a struggling company. You:
A. Ignore DRM solutions and the coming tidal wave of hollywood support and cash and apps that will work with Palladium-type processor hacks.
B. Make your chip support and embrace DRM.
As an investor, I can guess "B" might be your answer...
If all DRM hardware [doesn't] sell then the technology
will be abandoned.
Not entirely true. If the cost of selling DRM technology exceeds the benefit, then it will be reduced in market share, perhaps to oblivion. On the other hand, if the benefits, which may include demands, or more precisely protection from, from entertainment and media conglomerates, exceed the costs of creating DRM, it will expand in use.
If it becomes standard, through de facto expansion, or mandate, then it will have marginal extra cost to manufacturers. This may enable market players to created added value in non-DRM technology, but the value-proposition, in lieu of wanted protections from aforementioned conglomerates, is exceedingly small. (ie. make something non-DRM and get sued.)
It it the clear intention of Hollywood and the Whitehouse that this would mean doing without a computer of any kind. Sounds like a fun future, doesn't it. This is the reality of consummer capitalism: the public is free to choose from the options the plutocrats set out for them, whether it is computer chips or presidents. In the later case, of course, they sometime have to fiddle the figures a bit if you're tedious enough to pick the wrong one but the reality is that a choice of two nobodies suits them much more than a real choice of people that might actually try to do a good job.
TWW
"Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
"Then fall, Geekdom!"
Seriously, one wonders what Mr. Torvalds thinks about working for a company who's implamenting a policy that's anathama to most of Open Source community.
Lawrence Person (lawrencepersonh@gmailh.com (remove all "h"s to mail)
http://www.lawrenceperson.com/
I doubt highly that Linus has any say either way on this thing. They didn't hire him for his outstanding management ability, but because he codes better than most, and at the hardware level (which, if I recall correctly, they are a hardware company *note sarcasm*). I don't like it either, but let's get of his back just because management took a direction we don't like.
"As long as defiance continues, they can't claim victory." -Slashdot comment
Been said before on this thread, but just to see if different words will encourage understanding.....
The title of the piece is "Transmeta Embeds Security in TM5800 Chips", it does not mention DRM or Palladium.
The 1st paragraph comments that there will be a Crusoe that has "embedded technologies for securing sensitive data and delivering tamper-resistant x86 storage environments", now it seems to me that they are making it possible for me to protect MY data.
The next paragraph is slightly less clear in their intentions, with "for securing sensitive data and intellectual property", as it doesn't mention who's intelectual property we are talking about.
I will put the next paragraph in in ts entirety as is says quite a bit "The new security technologies include secure hidden storage of confidential information, encryption acceleration and a processor architecture that can be extended to support new features and industry standards, such as the Advanced Encryption Standard (AES)"
I am going to stop quoting now as the link to the story is available in the initial posting.
Lets look at my current config on my web server to see where this new chip could benefit me.
The server is running SSL versions of Courier MTA, Courier IMAP server, and Apache. Then there is the fact that the only way to log onto the box is via SSH.
Do I see rather a lot of encryption going on there - I think I do.
So if my processor can accelerate that then its a bonus not a problem.
Add stuff like tunnelling X through SSH tunnels and I would be a happy person.
So this is a rather useful tool, rather than the thin edge of the wedge, at least as it looks to me from the available info, I could be wrong, but at least I am not just seeing Palladium/DRM lurking around every corner.
And no, I am not pro-Palladium, in fact I have posted previously about my fears of Palladium, and its possible negative impact on my ability to do what I want with the computers that I own.
But lets not get hysterical people
Where is Linus, WTF? Isn't he the beloved champion of the Linux kernal, and now the company he works for is implementing DRM? Well you know what he should do he should quit. After all how hard could it be to find a new job with the way the tech jobs are. After all DRM is evil. Maybe the RIAA is getting Transmeta to do this so that they can get DRM on Linux first. That will show all those free software hippies, eh?
Boycott any hardware that supports "DRM"
NO, NO, NO! As someone who works in the consumer digital media industry, this is not the right idea. The B2B (that's business-to-business) companies, e.g. Transmeta and many others, who produce hardware, firmware, and software support are bound to do what their customers (consumer electronics companies) want them to produce. If they don't, someone else gets the contract, period. The failure of Transmeta or TI or ARM does *nothing* to stop DRM. But there is a means that will work:
Boycott end-user products that use unacceptable DRM technologies. A few good market failures will send a loud message to the CE companies that no one wants DRM products. They stop asking for it, and companies like Transmeta will be more than happy to no longer waste development effort on a feature their customers will no longer pay for. Then the CE and the B2B hardware companies become your allies in the fight against DRM -- because you've taught them that to do otherwise limits their bottom lines.
"The market drives the economy."
/. - if they can do that, what can't they do? If the market drives the economy and Microsoft owns the market and the vast majority of the market simply doesn't give a rats fanny what their computer does so long as they can send an email to Aunt Bob (sex change) and go to www.geneology.com, just what do you think a few geeks wearing "Just Say No" teeshirts are going to accomplish?
/. and perhaps a wildly misquoted Newsforge article, and the EFF guys are the experts - so let the experts deal with it and support them exhaustively. /. is quickly getting famous for generating millions of uneducated and just totally wrong flame mail to people since no one here seems to be capable of stopping and thinking - at least EFF puts some thought into it's debates and actions...
Who owns the market? Who was it that heralded in the age of Winmodems? PnP? Who's coming out with new Microsoft ready flatscreen Monitors. Who in the PC market *isn't* on the Microsoft train? To dis Microsoft in the PC devices market is to quickly die an painful death. Heck, Microsoft is even paying for advertising here on
DRM is here and it's not going away. Every hardware manufacturer is to please Microsoft because they see nothing but dollar signs. Even Hollywood is Microsoft - until suddenly Hollywood becomes Microsoftwood - and it *will* happen. Heck, Microsoft even has Bush and Dick to play with.
And you actually think Apple is a hero? When Apple users can't listen to CD's and play DVD's because DRM is required, they'll jump on the DRM train as fast as anyone else - they're just trying to sop up all you "Boycotters" to boost it's share - trust me, it's not a matter of if they adopt DRM, it's a matter of when they adopt DRM. It's only a matter of time.
Do what you've always done before all this crap hit the fan and before Linux was suddenly "popular" - ignore all that extranious garbage and develop the best operating system you've ever used. If DRM throws a wrench in the works - well, tell me, since when has there ever been a challenge that could not be hacked? Hack DRM and move on. I mean, have we truly lost the ability to reverse engineer? Have all our genious programmers gotten fat and lazy with the sudden influx of help from all the Big Guys? Heck, dongle-cracks are harder to circumvent than DRM will be, and you know how easy it is to crack a dongle - or don't you?
If you're all staring around at Microsoft and Hollywood and DRM and such, that means you're not staring at Kernel code, which means it will quickly start sucking because all your quality time is being spent running around like panicking chickens. them. them all. Then don't respect them in the morning. If they want to play the DRM game and Winmodem game and WinNIC game and all that Microsoft-centric crap, let them - that's their perogative and you can't do a thing about it. Now, when Linux gets 90% market share, then we can come off as expecting the hardware manufacturers to start stroking us. Till then, get yer strokes at from yer pr0n sites and concentrate on the task at hand...hacking Linux to be even better and better and let the chips fall where they may.
DRM my - we're our worst enemies as much as Microsoft is it's own worst enemy. Let's not ourselves please...
For those of you who have as much a clue to
printf "hello world";
as I do to quantum physics and have an extra dime in yer pocket, then join EFF...let them worry about and coordinate activities concerning the rights of users and free software. That's their job. You haven't a clue about it excepting what you read on
The problem is that with ??AA dictating what DRM is with MS as their accomplice, this is unlikely to be allowed.
I was thinking further about the discussion about how "trusted" is understood in the phrase "trusted computing". The essence of what is being proposed is being able to trust the computer when you can't, or more correctly won't trust the operator (user/admin) of that computer.
Trusting the user is fundamental to the philosophy behind Open/Free Source. There is no practical way to keep the admin of a Linux system from being able to defeat any DRM system that Linux implements. You have the source, so you can always hack up a version that strips it out and lets you do whatevery you want.
That being said, it is completely possible to implement a fair DRM scheme in Linux, and since you are trusting the operator anyway, any special support in the HW/BIOS isn't really needed. Since we are now back in control, we can design it to be fair, and have the 'R' in DRM stand for rights, not restrictions. In other words, we would empower the user in excercising fair-use rights to back-up, change formats, share with friends (within fair use bounds, of course).
This probably won't satisfy DRM proponents, but I think it is important that the community respond to them with a true willingness to protect the copyright holders rights as well. If all the standard distros make good faith efforts to produce a system that respects both DRM and fair use, the average user will leave all the controls in place and when they make copies, they will know that there are fair use limits to be respected. Some may still choose to cross the line, and others will go further to circumvent controls completely. But the community will be demonstrating their stand for the rights of all parties involved.
Still, the ugly head of the DMCA rears its head. At least in the US, this law gives all the power to the DRM proponents to just deny Linux access to protected content. It would be bold, but not unreasonable to assert the right to implement the program outlined above even in the face of the DMCA. After all, you are making a good faith effort to implement the controls (sans fair use restictions), not trying to "break" the controls. Now, I wouldn't do this on my own and risk the legal attention of a number of large companies, but this would require a lot of coordination in the community to pull it off anyway.
This is Digital Rights Denial, implimented at the hardware level. You will not be able to publish in the new format, only a few existing publishers get they keys. They will continue to have all the power they enjoy under a dead tree economy without any of the costs. You will loose the ability to make any kind of publication at all, including paper, and will recieve even less that you might currently.
Don't waste your effort, many dedicated people are working hard to screw you and everyone else. Just sit back and relax.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
It isn't all evil, people. But this is slashdot so I'd better go screw myself, eh?
Sounds like exactly what you're planning to do. I certainly don't want to stop you if you want to give yourself the shaft.
Chances are, if your eBook goes nowhere, it'll be at least as much to do with the fact that nobody likes DRM formats as whether or not the content is crap, and since you wrote means you don't even know what's going on around you it probably will be.
DRM-broken E-books are not selling.
Didn't you learn anything from the recent discussion of the Baen Free Library? They are giving away earlier works of name authors with their permission, and the publisher and the authors are suddenly drastically more profitable than they ever have been before.
Baen makes it's ebooks available in non-protected formats.
Tech Public Policy stuff