Researchers Looking at Alternatives to Palladium

An anonymous reader writes "Some folks at Stanford have been looking at an alternative architecture for doing trusted computing (ala Palladium) based on using Virtual Machines. They presented a brief paper describing their work a couple weeks ago at the USENIX Workshop on Hot Topics in Operating Systems . In their paper they also discuss a bunch of non-DRM applications of Trusted Computing such as distributed firewalls, improving P2P security, preventing DDOS, and even strengthening civil liberty protections."

Comments

There's nobody stoping...

[Anonymous Coward]

Anybody from trusting anybody else now. We could create distrib-firewalls if we wanted to.

The fact is DRM takes away the PEOPLES' rights to choose who to trust.

Re:There's nobody stoping...

[Jordy]

No, corporations want to control what you do with the works they sell you, something copyright nor first sale doctrine does not give them the right to do.

For instance, a book publisher can not sell you a book you're not allowed to resell. They also can not forbid you from reading a book more than once or reading the book to your child.

DRM enables copyright holders to completely eliminate used sales and move the entire world to a pay-per-view world. Even more, it allows the copyright holders to have a perpetual copyright; one that will never expire for as long as the work is encrypted.

You will not "own" anything. Sure technically you own your DRM'ed digital music downloads, but just try to resell them.

The "value" of DRM'ed goods is significantly less than physical goods, but people won't realize that until laws get put in place forcing retailers to mark these goods as such.

Re:There's nobody stoping...

[Amazing Quantum Man]

No, I want to talk about the RIAA and MPAA. Specifically the MPAA.

I saw an ad for a DVD that said "Own [some movie] today on DVD". It did not say, "License [some movie]".

Therefore, they are selling me a copy of that movie. By the doctrine of First Sale, it is mine to do with as I wish, including cracking the CSS or region coding, folding, spindling, or mutilating, reselling to someone else.

The only thing that I may not do is reproduce it for other people, since I don't hold the copyright.

a Good Thing

[trans_err]

Rather this alternative to Palladium does or doesn't work at the fact that OTHER companies are looking into creating this kind of system makes the future of Palladium-esque systems look a lot better. Competition is a Good Thing and handing the reigns to microsoft with out look bad is a bad thing, microsoft or not a company should not have that much power. If this market becomes more diversified we will see better products, rather from microsoft or not, and people will start listening to the peanut gallery ranting for a better system.

Re:a Good Thing

[Knife_Edge]

"microsoft or not a company should not have that much power"

Microsoft does have the power to do whatever they want with their operating system. Yet, for some reason that does not matter to me. I am not forced to use it, see? As long as there are some alternatives (and there are right now if you are willing to learn), I will be fine. More people need to be made aware of the alternatives, is all.

And to everyone who says, but what if Microsoft and some media companies get together to make some kind of system that ensures that content distributed in this system could only be used in extravagantly restrictive ways?

Well, darn, I guess I will not buy that content. I suppose I will just continue consuming media in all the other ways it is available to me that are easier and cheaper.

Some guy asked a better 'what if' recently in another discussion on Palladium. What if systems using this technology are required to access the Internet?

Oh, Microsoft controls the Internet now?

This is just another silly copy protection scheme, nothing more. As are any alternative silly copy protection schemes. Take the tinfoil hats off, folks.

Too bad...

[PS-SCUD]

One is proposed by some folks in Stanford, the other is proposed by Microsoft and Intel.

Guess which one is going to matter?

Faking out Palladium?

[Asprin]

Moreso, would it be possible to fake out Palladium-dependent software by running it in an emulator that simulates the undelying Palladium subsystem?

What does a program REALLY KNOW about where it lives?

Wow, This is JUST like "The Matrix".

Palladium,DRM = no trust or rights

[AtariAmarok]

What misleading terms they are. How can Palladium have anything to do with "trust" when they violate trust and anything else by intruding into my computer and controlling my content?

How can DRM "protect rights" when it denies basic rights of fair use?

Re:Palladium,DRM = no trust or rights

[.com b4 .storm]

How can DRM "protect rights" when it denies basic rights of fair use?

Ah, but there's the rub. It's not about protecting YOUR rights, it's about protecting the rights of the big corporations. Well not so much their rights as the "rights" they want - i.e. control over your computer and everything you use it for.

Which would you choose.

[xA40D]

So from MS we get Trusted Computing where "trusted" means trusted by big corporations who want to sell you stuff without any chance of copying.

From these guys we get Trusted Computing where trusted means trusted by the guys building the network.

So, which would you choose?

Real meaning of trusted computing!

[AtariAmarok]

Why is it called "trusted computing" after all, when it violates trust?

The problem is we are looking at the wrong definition of trust. Most of us have in mind the primary definition: "Firm reliance on the integrity, ability, or character of a person or thing" or "Custody; care"

You have to look down the list to find the definition of "trust" that fits perfectly with Microsoft, RIAA/MPAA and the Palladium idea:

"A combination of firms or corporations for the purpose of reducing competition and controlling prices throughout a business or an industry."

Might as well called it "monopolized computing". Means the same thing.

You forgot a BIG part of computer history

[AtariAmarok]

"Computers started out simplistic, under the user's complete control..."

No, they started out controlled by men in white coats in clean rooms.

The microcomputer and PC revolution changed all this.

The regressive trend back to "Master Control" started with Scott McNelly of Sun Microsystems. I remember when he first laid out his grand vision of returning everything to central control via the Internet. Java was part of this. Microsoft copied the rhetoric, announcing a time when your Word app and even your Word docs would all be on Microsoft's central servers.

MPAA refuses my money

[AtariAmarok]

"If the Riaa and Mpaa do not trust people with the media, why show it? They, in effect, release the idea to everybody when they put some show/song in mass media."

Not only that, but the MPAA commonly encourages piracy.

Let's say I want to see "The Two Towers". It is no longer in theatres, can't go there. It is a LONG time before they sell a DVD; so I can't pay them that way by buying a DVD. The only alternative is to obtain somehow a pirated DVD copy of "The Two Towers".

No way should they whine about money-loss to piracy when they aren't selling it in the first place! There is a demand for their product, and in this example, they refuse to meet it in any way.

Re:MPAA refuses my money

[murdocj]

Let's say I want to see "The Two Towers". It is no longer in theatres, can't go there. It is a LONG time before they sell a DVD; so I can't pay them that way by buying a DVD. The only alternative is to obtain somehow a pirated DVD copy of "The Two Towers".

So if someone won't sell you something you want, it's ok to steal it? For God's sake, grow up! Learn to wait a couple of months for the dvd to come out.