Slashdot Mirror
From DRM to Rights Management Services
miladus writes "Microsoft has formed an academic Think
Tank on Trustworthy Computing. The Academic Board is to advise
Microsoft on 'security, privacy and reliability enhancements in[...]
products and technologies so that Microsoft can obtain critical
feedback on product and policy issues related to its Trustworthy
Computing.' An interview
with two members of the board is an interesting read, especially
concerning the global implications of privacy. Of note, is the absence
of DRM discussion.
But DRM shows up as 'Rights Management Services' in the promised Widows
Rights Management Services to be released later this year. it will
deliver a 'platform-based approach to persistent policy rights for
Web content and sensitive corporate documents of all types'"
Is Microsoft expanding to life insurance?
how much will those brainiacs get paid? I've never trusted "scientific" opinions from researchers paid by commercial companies. (What's more, I don't even trust most scientific opinions:)
So, Everyone that goes to the new version of Office will be locked into a forced upgrade stream? What happens when MS comes out with Office 12? Will everyone that uses 11 find that their documents suddenly "expire" because the new version of office is out?
:)
I don't like it. MS wants to control every 0 and 1 that flows through your computer.
Looks like its time to dig out the 'ole Commodore 64.
Just my 64k-is-enough-for-me's worth
-RickTheWizKid
For example, where I work, we are required by law to have a level of security on certain information; this info should never be reaching people who do not fall under the same laws.
With a technology in place to protect that data, our jobs as the IT staff becomes much easier.
MS is, in my view, breaking new ground with this; some people may not like what they are doing, but you have to admit that nobody else is putting this stuff into their OS (when there is clearly a need for it).
Manipulate the moderator system! Mod someone as "overrated" today.
Hopefully MS will eat their own dogfood on this so their memo's stop leaking out, or maybe that's the whole driving force behind this.
"Not knowing when the dawn will come, I open every door." - Emily Dickinson
...the word "Trustworthy" in a direct connection with "Microsoft"? Wohooo... and I thought that only the Slashdot geeks had a sense of irony...
-- Power corrupts, but PowerPoint corrupts absolutely.
Can someone get the little Mozilla beast icon to eat the little Bill Gates beast icon and put us out of our grief?
*consoles self in reality distortion field*
*honk*
This is my sig. It's prescription, I swear. I need it for reading things... on the other side of things
The acronym of that would be RMS.... RMS is evil.. No wait... that *other* RMS.......
On a sidenote, I hadn't heard about MS changing their product line to 'Widows'..... Another interesting name change...
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
Will Microsoft use drm to make sure the DOJ can not investigate them for illegal practices. If Bill Gates unfamouns email about choking netscapes air supply timebombs then the doj would have no evidence. Case closed!
http://saveie6.com/
What do you call computer users whose digital rights have all died because of their choice of platform/license agreement? Microsoft Widows.
http://tinyurl.com/4ny52
It is very hard to go after a corporation. You have to prove that companyA knew about the corruption and hid it. Kenith Lay just recieved $200 million from his involvment with Enron and is retiring in peace as a wealthy man. Why? He claimed he didn't know about what was going on in accounting. Since he moved the money he recieved to his retirement fund he avoided litagation from angry stock holders and co-workers. A very sneaky loophole indeed. He can't be prosecuted or sued. Hiding information is key to avoiding prosecution and obsrtucing justice. With drm this makes the doj's and fcc's power void. Microsoft had been doing this for years and got away with an EU investigation in 93 because of it.
The doj could not even prove that Microsoft strong armed OEM's to bundle office because of lack of evidence. They decided to go only after IE because of the one email from Gates about chocking their air supply since someone forgot to delete the email.
Your innocent until proven guilty and corporations can drag court cases for years because they have so much money. Timebombing and drm is perfect. With no data you can not prosecute anyone.
http://saveie6.com/
How exactly is Digital Rights Management expected to work? Is the idea sort of a "this message will self destruct in five seconds" kind of deal? From DRM story to DRM story posted on Slashdot, I see the discussions range from privacy and data integrity to piracy or rights. The ability to cause sensitive data to disappear seems more like a technological tool that can be added to other tools for specific types of communication, not some imposition of our rights to download w4r3z on KaZaA or whatever. In fact, if I get sent an email that will self-destruct, what's keeping me from forwarding that message to a sendmail server with no such mechanism for message self-destruction, copying / pasting the message into a text document, or even screenshotting the contents? This comment isn't meant to flame or troll -- I simply want to know what I don't.
<:
but I think you must trust MS 100% before this can be considered a "good thing."
.).
"With a technology in place to protect that data, our jobs as the IT staff becomes much easier."
It's very simple, if, say, my medical information gets out 'cause some MSCE stopped thinking about security 'cause MS told them to, you better believe I am going to do everything in my power to destroy that incompetent individual's career.
I see people stupidly pick MS all the time for no other reason than it is "MS." Well guess what, most of the time things are NOT working as a result. That's fine, but when we are talking about security required by laws, you better make damn sure YOU actually understand the system you are implementing, and I have yet seen an MS product implemented by someone who actually had an understanding of the innerworkings of the product (though they did read the marketing brochure . .
Sdelat' Ameriku velikoy Snova!
While the implications of Microsoft being able to leverage ("embrace and extend") any built in DRM/CRM (Digital Rights Management/Content Rights Management) is disturbing, what worse is that companies are going to jump all over this kind of technology. It literally allows the company to control information from CEO right down to the mailboy's desktop. To a corporation that doesn't respect/trust/value its employees, this technology is a godsend, up there with keystroke loggers.
What's worse, is it will allow corporations to act with even more impunity. Microsoft isn't the only corporation whose business model could stand to gain something through DRM. They're talking about restricting what a person can do with data -- including preventing that "We're Dead if this thing shows up in court" memo from being printed by a Whistleblower.
Letting corporations act solely in their best interest, and preventing the individual from counter acting in his, is a dire formula for a free society.
You could have rights managment systems out the yinyang, but if the software running it is full of bugs, buffer overflows, back doors, code that auto preruns unauthorized stuff, or sends private info to MS headquarters (Yeah I know MS would never have eny of these problems) Then it will not matter a bit, even if every damn piece of data and code is digitally signed, registered, and pre-authed - it won't matter. In fact it could make things worse as people actually leave their systems less secure - assuming that they are less hackable or that they will know when people copy stuff. BZZZT. God help them, they'll need it.
Here's how it works. The new version of Office comes out, and it's perfectly backward compatable.
But it isn't *forward* compatible.
So all you have to do is get one company that a lot of other companies need to do business with in on the plot and get them to make the switch.
Your Office documents are perfectly readable by them, but everything they send YOU your older version can't read. So if you want to continue to do business with them you have to switch too.
It's a very effective way to force upgrades without giving any overt appearance that that's what you're doing.
They don't lock you out of your documents. They lock you out of everybody else's.
KFG
Though I find it amusing that MS is pushing it as a sort of security option instead of as a privacy invading option. "Protect sensitive corporate documents?"
From what? Have I been missing the "sensitive corporate document" section in Kazaa? Can I, without the aid of several illegal tools which I would never never never even THINK about using simply go and download sensitive corporate documents without their permission?
Besides the way corporations have been going I'm not sure that anything that increases their document security is automatically a good idea. I know they're going to screw me, but I'd rather see it coming.
ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
Here's a good one check out this about CORDS [loc.gov]
" The U.S. Copyright Office Electronic Registration Recordation and Deposit System is the Copyright Office's system for registering claims over the Internet. Through the Internet, copyrighted works become available throughout the world instantaneously. As copying these digital works becomes easier, copyright protection is imperative."
Actually this could be cool, however following it to a illogical conclusion there are loopholes for massive abuse. A media file would have a locatable Digital signature that a filtering router could read. Check against a database for known bootlegs and you got your filter. (hmmm, run it on a linux box and finally get some RIAA/Evil use out of those longhaired geeks)
If no Digital sig is found then implant one and forward the file and new sig so the RIAA can add it to the registry for later review. Cause it could be a new burn of the latest N'Sync song or that one about Fred Durst telling Britney Spears to drop dead. you could plot the movement of files from user/site to user/site and show who gave what to who and when. You end up with a nifty tracking scheme.
This is a classic 'Man in the Middle' attack, one of those things the RIAA/MPAA wanted to do not so long ago.
Opps, You would have a way to hit them back. Say your ISP, the UofWhereEver goes and alters a music file with a fingerprint then they are subverting your property. If the file is legally obtained say self-produced then the original artist (you) will have a very clear case for copyright infringement. They will have created and distributed a reproduction of your recording for 'Commercial Gain' (acting as an agent for a speculative RIAA lawsuit), which is 99.94%, exactly the same as your copyrighted material.
So they have just violated Federal Copyright law by clandestinely adding a digital fingerprint. You can extract this new tag by doing a diff of the file against the orginal. Even a certain lackwitted judge in say Pennsylvania would be able to understand it then.
yes this is a rerun
Sorry about the writing. Robot fingers, you know? Cliff Steele in DOOM PATROL #23