Slashdot Mirror
Gates on Digital Restrictions Technologies
doormat writes "According to this article, Gates says you can choose not to use the new secure PC technology that they're developing. Is that going to be a choice like being a vegetarian, or like choosing not to eat at all?" There's also a short piece about DRM and Linux, which is a follow-up to Linus on DRM.
How long before MS decides that they will only provide windows for this thing and anything else doesn't offer the needed security? So, you can either use these or you can use something that doesn't run Windows.
Fine for a lot of people here, but what will happen is businesses will still want windows and office, so they'll buy into this, and hardware makers will look at the other stuff as a non-profitable niche market.
Normally I'm not as hard on MS as most of the /. crowd, but gotta give a "boo... hiss..." on this one.
Stop by my site where I write about ERP systems & more
If I understand everything correctly I'm no longer going to be the owner of my content but have to ask my Computer very nicly if i can have a look at it.. hmm.. And furthermore if i want to use an other program then the microsoft suite. I have to use a program that changes it's code to the specs of microsoft. In other words the tools I can use other the microsoft have to walk the microsoft walk.. I'm not pleases with this 'security' force upon me..
Oh, wait, you didn't read any of this. It never happened. Go back to sleep.
It's funny how Microsoft is quick to claim that the ultimate burden of security does not lie with them, and accepts no responsibility for the flaws in their code. They then turn around and push DRM like there is no tommorow. It's obvious that this is a power grab.
There will come a day when you'll be doing all your hacking on a ten-year-old, "pre-ban" PC without DRM. Old hardware is going to be a valuable asset.
And just yesterday Taco couldn't get enough of that good Apple DRM-loving that's built in as a "choice" in the Ipod/ITunes service. Intriguing difference in tone.
Slashdot would do its readers if it revealed just how much schwag and/or monetary compensation Apple has provided its editors thus far.
No credibility.
Opting out? How can I opt out? Will there be a big warnng box upon install that says, "Check this box if you wish to opt out of using secutiry features." Or will it be turned on by default and installed already when Joe User buys a new PC? Will it be easy to turn off?
Heck. How many Joe Users know right now if their Unique Chip Identifier is turned on in bios? (ala Pentium III UID technology).
I tend to not like this optional feature. It will take one hour for someone to release a worm that turns it on without knowledge, turns it off without knowledge, or reports all sort of fun info without Joe User's knowledge.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
"First things first -- but not necessarily in that order"
-- The Doctor, "Doctor
Many of the functions that will be built into hardware were emulated by software because the chips are not yet built.
Wasn't the main argument by Microsoft that security would have to be implemented at the hardware level to be truely secure? The only reason this is such a big deal is because his plan is to more tightly integrate his software with hardware for security purposes. If so much of this could be implemented as only software, doesn't that already prove the point that this isn't a necessary technology (at least not the way they are portraying it)? I personally don't believe this tight coupling of secure software with secure hardware will be the panacea Bill's talking about, but this demo helps prove this hardware push is more about integration and control than security.
Developers: We can use your help.
But the story says that communications between programs "could not be intercepted." I am assuming this means that it is encrypted, and that in this system the hardware stores some kind of unique private key. If this is the case, there is nothing new here that open source software hasn't provided. We have GnuGP for trusted email, and OpenSSH for shells, file transfers, and there's even a plugin for Gaim!
I don't understand why you would want some sort of hardware encryption. Because lets say AMD/Intel produce the keys. How hard would it be for them to keep a list of these keys and give copies to the FBI/CIA? Then, even when you *think* you are using a trusted platform you are being monitored. At least right now I know that I am not using secure communications.
Well, if Microsoft isn't serving your needs, perhaps you should look into one of the excellent alternatives out there? A Powerbook or Linux perhaps? Sure you don't want to pay for Windows pre-installed, then wipe it and pay for SuSE or whatever, but if that extra ~$70 actually gets you a computer YOU have control over instead of MS, maybe it's worth it?
>And then when this MS bumble fails like so many
>other MS things have, everyone will see it for
>what it is. Is passport used the way MS said it
>would be? No.
That doesn't always happen. Microsoft is inserting more and more "creeping featuritis" into Windows. Do you really want to trust MS's assertions that they won't use it? Remember Amazon's privacy policy changes? (Today: Give us your personal information; we PROMISE not to sell it to spammers. Tomorrow: We changed our minds, and we're sure you'll love these eight trillion emails from bukkake.com.)
Let's say we all roll over and accept DRM as a harmless, unusued feature. Who's to say that buried in some EULA for Windows 2006 XP won't be a clause that using Windows Update authorizes MS to turn on DRM? With the flip of a switch (well, the toggle of a BOOL), MS becomes Hollywood's bestest pal.
I don't want to let MS embed a bomb in my system. Thanks, no.
>TIP: The world is revolving around the US less
>and less every day.
TIP: Network effects are powerful forces. Sure, we can switch, if we don't ever want to access our old Word documents or run 90% of the software that's commercially available.
David Stein, Esq.
Computer over. Virus = very yes.
So in 5 years, all AMD and Intel chips will have DRM enabled, and Windows will have it on by default. There is absolutely nothing to prevent this from happening. Now in this scenario, if you find a way to disable the DRM, either in the chip or in the software, you can be prosecuted under the DMCA. Or maybe detained without a trial under the Patriot Act as a threat to national security. (if they succeed in getting it made permanent)
Maybe I am creating a "worst case" scenario, but it is certainly plausible. Who would have thought 5 years ago that the US would be able to hold a few hundred people captive without a trial. Or that a college student would be sued for creating a search engine. Or a programmer would be arrested and held in jail for speaking at a security conference. Or a printer cartridge manufacturer would be sued because they are making generic cartridges. Or any of the other BS that has come out of the DMCA. Some people said "Oh, if the DMCA get abused, it will be repealed because the people won't stand for it." Here is a hint: it has been abused repeatedly, and it is nowhere near being repealed. Things are getting worse.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
Would they do this? Sure, in a rats ass moment they would... first, it would bring them revenue from companies who want to get software published (CHARGE THE DEVELOPERS!!!)... second, they would have to certify it so they would require the source code... hmmmm... look at what they're doing in this chunk of code (SUE!!!!) or ... hmmm, look at what they're doing in this chunk of code (STEAL, PATENT AND SUE!!!!). And consider someone perhaps M$ doesn't like... guess what, it doesn't pass certification... period.
As an independent game development company without the resources of the giants, this type of move scares me shitless.
I'd say aloha in leaving, but I have no aloha for the likes of bill gates and his ilk.
I would love to sell computers with 2000 on them and not XP or whatever the next boatware is gonig to be - but I can't since M$ no longer sells licenses to old OS's. Sure, individuals can buy old licenses 2nd hand and install themselves, but that's an extremely small percentage of people. 95% of people buy their machine with a pre-installed OS, and that is going to be the latest M$ bloatware because you can't run a PC business scavanging old licenses here and there. You have to have a reliable supply of licenses.
As a seller I'm forced to put whatever the latest Winbloze is on the machines I sell. Actually, forcing people to buy something they don't want or need is illegal. It's called racketeering and it's what the auto companies got smacked down on for in the 60's/70's. They were required to publish the specs for any car they no longer sell/service. M$ should be forced to publish the source for old OS's it no longer supports. M$ also shouldn't be allowed to prevent the use of such old OS's. To do so and force people to buy a newer version is racketeering.
Woopty Doo Basil, what does it all mean?!
The part that we aren't being told:
That the option "on" or "off" is only going to last long enough to get the "off" phased out.
Instead of letting statements from Microsoft 'sink into your head' try using your brain.
That's what competition is for! That's why there are alternatives!
:)
Like... Mac OS X
Like... Linux
Yes, it sucks if the majority platform becomes stupid, but there are still workable alternatives.
Of course, if Microsoft decides to drop Office support for Mac, then we've got another problem
Or maybe Apple will see this as the opportunity to finally release OS X86... I'm joking!
GPL Deconstructed
And how is that a vulnerability? It causes IE to crash, it's a bug. It doesn't give anyone any access to your box.
Crazy phil man saith :
:
:
:
:
> stock up on fast systems now, while you can.
> Get all your computer purchasing out of the way this year,
> and skip the whole DRM thing entirely.
Here's where I think the dividing line is on Wintel.
I'd be grateful for corrections.
Disk drives - CPRM
- No CPRM-mandatory products in wide distribution.
BIOS - TCPA
- no data. Anyone know which ones have TCPA support
already built in?
Processor - La Grande
- current P4 dice don't have La Grande, CPU IDs can be disabled.
- Prescott-design processors due "in the third quarter
of 2003" will have La Grande
Chipset -
The hot intel "Canterwood" chipset seems to work well
with non-La Grande processors. Will its successor?
OS - Palladium, EULAs, etc.
- Windows 9x is not an operating system.
No actual security of any kind is really possible.
- Windows 2000 is a real OS, albeit kinda klunky.
but it doesn't have the hooks to make DRM mandatory.
Up to SP2 the EULAs were acceptable - then the EULA for SP3
had that scary clause about agreeing that MS could download and
install updates without your knowledge or further consent,
(now it looks like that was just CYA for the "auto update"
feature, which can be turned off). But I think that you can
run Windows 2000 at SP 2 or 3 and be in the clear, especially
if you don't rush into any further service packs or updates
without careful scrutiny. Withdrawn from market, but still
available e.g. on ebay.
- Windows XP is the same OS as Windows 2000, with a whole
lot of minor annoyances fixed. Big improvement in backward
compatibility with Windows 9x: it's a far better gaming platform.
But it was designed to be the carrot that lured people onto
Passport and MyWallet, and to support Windows Media DRM.
May already be some Palladium or precursor under the hood.
Currently being shipped on all new OEM boxen.
- Longhorn, or whatever the next generation is codenamed:
it will be possible for someone to configure it to make Palladium
mandatory. Will the owner of the HW be allowed to configure it?
- You don't own any data; you pay
a monthly fee for access to certain data, some of which you
may have created. If you quit paying, you lose acceess, and
the data might go away.
Windows Media Player
Trojan Horse. Introduces DRM, and each update locks it down tighter,
gives the user less control. EULAs and built-in DRM already
onerous and unacceptable in 7.1. People who download and install
the current WMP 9 are drinking the kool-aid.
Real Player, Quicktime, etc.
I have no knowledge. Anyone?
So, I conclude that if I wish to continue with Wintel
and still have control of my data, I *must* buy a new box
with a fast P4 on a Canterwood chipset, and I must do
it this summer while I still can.
Wait a minute. Didn't I say that on the other side of the record? I'd better check
One word: iTunes.
Right now people are downloading songs at a clip of a million a week. And these are Mac users with MacOS X only. When this makes its way onto Windozers...look out!
Steve has proven that if people are given a value-added service at a reasonable price, without the spyware and security hazards that P2P seems to be ridden with, they will choose the pay service over the free service. $0.99/song and $9.99/album is a damn good deal. Once the volume kicks in and the Windows users show up, watch the price per song actually go DOWN. Volume, baby! Volume!
I dislike that the Five Families of the Record Business will get their cut. My husband is a musician and I hate the RIAA even more because of that. The music industry has ripped off musicians from the very beginning, from the Edison Patents Trust on down. However, iTunes is a very compelling reason for me to bite the bullet and upgrade my Mac G3 Blue-and-white to Jagwire and to download iTunes 4.
Give them ease of use, limits on DRM*, a big pool of music that is growing exponentially day by day, and reasonable prices, and you will make money on downloadable music.
*Rip your paid-for AACs to CD-DA, Mix 'em up on your playlist, and Burn them to CD-R. Then Re-rip to MP3 or Ogg or whatever is your pleasure.
Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power multiplied.
"Actually, since they're planning on implementing a software kernel (like a mini-OS) in a BIOS chip, you won't know what it's doing at all."
:o)
Well, since 99% of Windows systems get fitted with a r00t kit at the first possible oportunity, Microsoft have decided to fit their own by default for your convenience
I'm betting on the fact that Sun, IBM or _someone_ (maybe the Chineese) will carry on making TCPA-free hardware for a while at least, which should give OSS types somewhere to go when all the rest have been influenced into not selling TCPA enabled systems.
Of course I don't think that MS have realise to what extent the backlash will be when copyright is overenforced - all those people currently using their rights (and the many millions more exceeding them) may well vote for a repaling of copyright law altogether. We can but hope.
Beep beep.
you'll know that you've opted out when a whole bunch of your digital media stops working.
if things go as planned for MS, there will probably be a seamless transition from non-DRM to DRM media. i guess that this means the the old "preDRM" media that you have (and the media that is sold w/o DRM) will work seamlessly with the new DRM stuff. and since the media providers want you not to know when they are selling you crippled media (ala copyprotected CDs without labels denoting them as such) then without due research into what a user is buying they will likely be purchasing DRM content. if they suddenly become enlightened to their fair-use rights and want to opt-out, they will likely forfeit usage (might as well be forfeiting ownership) of the DRM stuff that they bought.
so, if you buy lots of music, movies, etc and its DRM and you decide later to opt out, i'm sure you will know _very_ soon that you have indeed opted out when you cannot play all of that wonderful content you payed for.
now, if you've opted out before purchasing and now want to play something that is only available as DRM, good luck. time to google for hacks that emulate DRM (which i hope can be coded).
Someone will find a way to circumvent DRM. And if the internet becomes inaccessible without the use of unacceptable Microsoft products, the people will find some other medium. Remember that BBS systems existed before the internet became popular. Perhaps a wireless BBS network will spring up. Or a secondary, unrestricted internet.
Never say die.
> When the "Next Generation Secure Computing Base" is in place,
> expect to pay EVERY time you watch or listen to anything produced
> by the television networks, the RIAA, and the MPAA.
You underestimate them.
In the OS after Longhorn, you will have to pay a monthly fee
to retain access to to data _you_created_.
If you have a disk, you will not control its contents;
you might not be allowed to know what's on it.
Your data and applications will only work if your computer
is net-connedted, so that the DRM mechanisms can watch what
you're doing.
Wait a minute. Didn't I say that on the other side of the record? I'd better check
what if I haven't fallen down yet, and if I did, I could get up on my own? Sure, we the people, could choose not to use this technology. But I would imagine that not too long after it creeps into everything technological in our lives, refusing to use it would be in effect like cutting off your nose to spite your face.
How many services would simply not be available to those who choose to take the road less traveled? There are already examples of this kind of insiduously malignant thinking taking place as we live and breathe:
- a Patriot Act which contained specific 'sunset clauses', now being attempted to be made permanent by Sen. Orin Hatch
- an incumbent administration which insists on erasing the lines that should clearly be drawn between church and state relationships
- anything related to the DMCA, UCITA, CDA, P2P, etc.
- Enron, Tyco, RIAA, MPAA, executive compensation, golden parachutes, and numerous other examples of obscenely piggish & unrepentant favoritism towards all things big business
- a constant succession of legal decisions favoring the white collar criminals who masquerade as upstanding corporate citizens of our communities
Why don't they simply make it a legal requirement to ask for and receive anyone's express permission to distribute their personal information? And then make it a felony to fsck with us if we don't sign on the dotted line. Oh yeah, I forgot: because it would be too much of an inconvenience for those who want to abuse our personal information.
Big Brother never had it so good.
"In the first demonstration of how the system would work, the company showed Tuesday how programs protected by the technology could not be altered or their communications intercepted by a malicious hacker, who happened to be played by a Microsoft worker dressed in a red T-shirt adorned with a skull."
:P
"In Tuesday's demonstration, the separate elements work seamlessly with each other. The only difference to the end user was that in the unsecured version, the hacker could alter the program and view the data; in the secure version, he could not."
If only I could have been there. Watching someone type and being told it worked seemlessly, then watching them type some more and being told they are locked out... I mean WOW. Where do I sign? Does it work with people wearing blue shirts too, or does it detect the skull I wonder? Could it be modified to detect ties and PHBs? Perhaps they have a new API call to disable all the horibly insecure existing API calls which let you snoop on any and all messages and data on the running system.
"Secure documents created in Microsoft Office, for instance, could be unusable on other operating systems or with other office productivity suites.
In the interview, Gates said it's up to other companies to ensure interoperability. "
Maybe when people get tired of doing - File Save as *.txt in order to share their files with others normal people will look a step or two past the default settings.