Phoenix's BIOS Roadmap

An anonymous reader writes "Phoenix Technologies Ltd. unveiled a vision and roadmap for a next generation of system BIOS firmware that the company calls "core system software" today, at its Strategy 2004 conference. As defined by Phoenix, CSS is a new category of core system firmware that transcends the boundaries of traditional BIOSes and to deliver "extensible firmware that provides the critical foundation of trust, manageability, and connectivity required for networked computing," in a broad range of devices including desktop and laptop PCs, servers, and handhelds gadgets. Specific technologies that Phoenix is integrating into its d-NA CSS firmware include: support for the Trusted Computing Group (TCG) specification, remote diagnostics and error-checking, intelligent configuration checking and integrated system policy management, automated provisioning of servers and server virtualization, "radically enhanced" device power management, embedded TCP/IP, remote management functions including dynamic provisioning, load balancing and software resource control, and an XML and SOAP standards-based interface to CSS functions."

Comments

Thanks but no thanks Phoenix..

[grub]

Trust -- [...] In addition, Phoenix d-NA will incorporate a new class of Windows-advantaged components that leverage the Microsoft CryptoAPI (CAPI) to provide unprecedented trust and intrinsic security for systems running Windows and .NET applications.

If this crap cannot be disabled then I guess I won't be using Phoenix BIOSes in the future. This whole "trust" nonsense is a thinly veiled attempt at shifting some of the security-onus from the OS to the hardware with the blessing of Microsoft along with the side "benefit" of Digital Rights Management.

This may start a whole new style of hacking; releasing BIOSes for flashing which have the DRM/Trust shite removed.

Re:Thanks but no thanks Phoenix..

[metallicagoaltender]

This may start a whole new style of hacking; releasing BIOSes for flashing which have the DRM/Trust shite removed.

Which brings us to our four favorite letters - DMCA!

The idea of DRM being embedded into BIOS certainly is disturbing, and though I've never really cared whose BIOS is on the hardware I'm buying, this certainly changes things. You have to wonder though - will anyone stay 'rogue' and avoid DRM, or will everyone conform, thereby leaving consumers with no real choices?

Re:Thanks but no thanks Phoenix..

[The One KEA]

And the people dehacking these BIOSes will probably be the same folks who dehack DVD firmware, like these guys.

The trick will be getting past the DRM in the unhacked BIOS to install the dehacked BIOS. Considering the skill of these hackers, it'll probably take them five minutes.

Personally, I think the best way to contest this is the age-old adage: Bote with your wallet. Don't buy mobos with these BIOSes -- buy the competition, even if it's not as useful. Make it clear to the mobo manufacturers that you won't buy a mobo with that BIOS, and because they used it you won't buy their stuff. If enough people refuse to buy this stuff, it'll sink faster than the Titanic (or the Itanic).

Re:Thanks but no thanks Phoenix..

[Yaa 101]

This is why open source hardware is so much needed...
I say this time and time again but nobody seems to care untill it is too late...

Re:Thanks but no thanks Phoenix..

[dslbrian]

This whole "trust" nonsense is a thinly veiled attempt at shifting some of the security-onus from the OS to the hardware with the blessing of Microsoft along with the side "benefit" of Digital Rights Management.

I agree with you. This sounds like a lock-in to MS compliant hardware, and forced DRM. I'll cast my vote by giving my money to a different BIOS vendor...

Interestingly this might give a boost to the open BIOS movement. When MS started locking people in with "authentication" of their OS and office products, there was a discernable jump in the popularity of OpenOffice.

Re:Thanks but no thanks Phoenix..

[beacher]

Here's what I want to know - "extensible firmware that provides the critical foundation of trust, manageability, and connectivity required for networked computing,"

MANAGEABILITY. You want control over my PC? Fine, dump the EULA and be RESPONSIBLE for what it and your software does- until then take that crap out

Legal concerns > /dev/drm/legal
-B

Re:Thanks but no thanks Phoenix..

[DGolden]

People do care. But, unlike software development, a chip fab still requires significant initial capital investment to get started. And chip fabrication is tied up in hardware patents - just as stupid as software patenting, but much more entrenched.

Re:Thanks but no thanks Phoenix..

[jilles]

The whole problem with trust is that I don't necessarily trust either phoenix or ms. This a problem because their security solutions more or less require me to do so. I think this is ultimately why this and similar approaches will fail in the market.

Trust requires open solutions. If I, or someone I trust, can't analyse & audit security solutions I use, these solutions are flawed. MS and phoenix pushing proprietary solutions implies that they do not understand this problem themselves.

Re:Thanks but no thanks Phoenix..

[drinkypoo]

This is certainly where LinuxBIOS comes in. One day those who wish to run a 100% DRM-free system may be forced to purchase hardware for its LinuxBIOS compliance :) I should think there would be an easier way to make sure you're not using anything that requires DRM, however, if that's your objection.

Re:Thanks but no thanks Phoenix..

[robslimo]

I can't remember the last time I even saw a Pheonix BIOS in any hardware, let alone stuff I bought. I'm guessing getting into microsoft's hip pocket is about the best business plan Pheonix can come up with.

They lost their BIOS market share fair and square by sitting on their butts, thinking the BIOS product was mature and not for the end user to muck about with. AMI and Award showed us (and the OEMs) what a BIOS could really do and the rest is history, including Pheonix's bottom line.

This latest move is their last ditch effort to re-invent themselves in Microsoft's shadow... and it just might work, unfortunately for the end users.

Re:Thanks but no thanks Phoenix..

[Adm1n]

again free your bios!

Re:Thanks but no thanks Phoenix..

[Usquebaugh]

FPGA Yes it's not real silicon but it's the best we can do at present. So fscking use it instead of bitching about no fab. We are never going to have a fab, get over, move sideways and continue. Once upon a time there was no GNU C compiler did people sit around wringing their hands, or did they use the tools they had and write one? People moan about no open source 3D support in Linux, well pick up an AGP based FPGA and implement one. DVD encoding, Factoring, etc PCI based FPGA. FPGA are cheap enough that any hardware hacker should have at least one installed in his PC. The more people that have them the cheaper they become. The more apps that are written for them, the more people will want them. So stop whining and go get yourself a FPGA.

Re:Thanks but no thanks Phoenix..

[dslbrian]

Why would you ever want to buy a fab? Forget that unless you plan on running a chip business. For working on a prototype you need to check out MOSIS. They might do low volume production also - I never checked into it.

I fab'ed my MS thesis project through MOSIS. Die area was approx 3.7mm square in 0.5um CMOS, and it cost about $3000 for 25 samples. Worked great. If I was ever going to do another private project I would go that route.

Re:Thanks but no thanks Phoenix..

[vigilology]

This whole "trust" nonsense is a thinly veiled attempt at shifting some of the security-onus from the OS to the hardware with the blessing of Microsoft along with the side "benefit" of Digital Rights Management.

If this keeps up, the meaning of the word 'trust' is going to change, more so than 'gay' has.

Re:Thanks but no thanks Phoenix..

[Mattcelt]

Nope, unfortunately. Phoenix, IIRC, is the largest provider of BIOS hardware out there. They specialize in OEM BIOS sales - nearly every Gateway or Dell computer I've ever seen had a Phoenix BIOS. I have already refused to purchase Phoenix-brand BIOSes for years because they lack functionality which is present it nearly every other mfg's BIOS.

Ironically, they also own the brand Award (my favorite BIOS), which is more fully-functioned than most (if not all) other mfgs. But when Phoenix DRM creeps its way into AWARD_SW, I will be sure to purchase another, unencumbered brand.

Re:Thanks but no thanks Phoenix..

[Trepalium]

Award was bought by Phoenix a long time ago (and IMO, when they did, Award BIOS's took a turn for the worse). AMI BIOS based machines are today, few and far between. I'm not sure why Award BIOS's were so popular, back in the day, but when Phoenix bought Award, they became the biggest BIOS vendor instead. I get the feeling that Award BIOS 6.0 was really just Pheonix BIOS in disguise (instead of the old two column list menu, it tries to pretend it's a dropdown menu).

Re:Thanks but no thanks Phoenix..

[kisielk]

Sorry man, but FPGA's are not cheap at all. Even a small to mid density FPGA on an evaluation board costs $500-$700 USD. If you want an FPGA with enough performance and a high enough clock rate to do something like 3D graphics, you're looking at that same price, but just for the chip alone, nevermind memory etc. If you were to purchase an entire board, or build one yourself, you're looking at a $1600-$3000 investment, depenind on the features you want.

Additionally, an AGP interface is not exactly a trivial thing to implement, and getting a license for a PCI or AGP core costs several thousand dollars as well.

I think we can safely say that open source FPGA hardware is well out of the reach of the vast majority of Linux / other OSS operating system users. Even if someone managed to implement all these devices, paying for the boards for all of them would costs 5-10x as much as a PC does now, a premium I'm sure most people are not willing to pay just to get open hardware.

Re:Thanks but no thanks Phoenix..

[Uma Thurman]

A long time ago I have a pentium-133 that would not boot from a CD-ROM. I bought a Mr. Bios upgrade and that fixed the problem. It looks like they are in the same business, and you can still buy new BIOS chips for your computer. The brand then and now is "Unicore".

BTW, the Mr. Bios had about 3 times as many configuration options as the old AMI bios that I replaced. And the manual it came with explained them quite well. For $70 I thought it was a good product, and it extended my use of my motherboard for 3 years.

Microsoft is going to become Apple?

[garcia]

Trust -- Devices serving as network endpoints can be integrated into to an easy to implement "trustworthy computing" model that leverages secure, digitally signed core system software. This is the critical first link in a "chain of trust." In addition, Phoenix d-NA will incorporate a new class of Windows-advantaged components that leverage the Microsoft CryptoAPI (CAPI) to provide unprecedented trust and intrinsic security for systems running Windows and .NET applications.

Trust? I don't trust either of these two companies to do anything but take over computer applications and hardware forcing people to use them to "protect" their investments.

Manageability -- Intelligent devices and servers based on Phoenix d-NA are able to provide self-management, self-healing and self-authentication as standard capabilities. By leveraging Phoenix d-NA, software developers in a wide range of categories, from identity management to asset management, will be able to incorporate intrinsic "device authentication" into the fabric of their offerings.

In other words, we are going to give you a unique fingerprint that can be traced back to you. You better not try anything funny with our digitally signed OSs.

Is Microsoft taking over the BIOS?

No, they are forcing us to use them. They are also forcing us to have our computers be traced back to us.

Phoenix and Microsoft recently announced that they were collaborating on CSS firmware focused on WinPE (Microsoft's Windows Preinstallation Environment tool), security, and future Microsoft client and server OS releases, intended to "improve a device's reliability, usability, manageability, and security."

Bullshit. It *might* be for some of this. It's most definitely not their main goal. They want to be able to stop their programs from being run w/o their authority. While this is all and good I don't believe our privacy should be violated to do so.

Who's to say that the BIOS won't phone home and report usage statistics on what OS is running, if there are multiple ones installed, what hardware is in use, etc... Just what we need, direct marketing due to hardware installations.

Would this be different if it was a group creating an open standard? Perhaps but I still wouldn't like it. Being that it is one of the most sinister corporations ever teaming up with a single BIOS company it worries me. I wonder if they realize that they are going to become Apple. Didn't they make their money because of open hardware?

Just my worthless .02,

Re:Microsoft is going to become Apple?

[Llewrend]

In this context, trust is a one-way street...

We have to trust them, they don't trust us.

Re:Microsoft is going to become Apple?

[MadMirko]

You need to remember that CSS is designed with the corporate network in mind, not the home user.

TRUST

Trust? I don't trust either of these two companies to do anything but take over computer applications and hardware forcing people to use them to "protect" their investments.

That's not the point. When you are running a big network, you can now detect when someone connects a device to your network that is not trusted by your organization in a simple and consistent way. You may even automatically drop it from the networ by discarding the traffic it generates, or similar things.

Manageability

In other words, we are going to give you a unique fingerprint that can be traced back to you. You better not try anything funny with our digitally signed OSs

We had that with the Pentium, and it had a way to disable it. Again, for a company this is very handy, no more different management tools for different servers (HP, Compaq, etc.), just a single interface.

Is Microsoft taking over the BIOS?

No, they are forcing us to use them. They are also forcing us to have our computers be traced back to us.

You act as if you had a great insight into the workings of a product that's not even available. From the article it sounds like there will be enhancements that benefit corporate customers, and doubly those deploying windows.

If you are not in this group, fine, just buy another board, or buy the board, and _don't install Windows_.

Re:Microsoft is going to become Apple?

[2nd Post!]

What, exactly, does this have to do with being like Apple?

Are you confusing open with commodity, and closed with proprietary?

Apple uses recognized standards:
Open Firmware
PCI
PCI-X
AGP
USB
Firewire
802.11
OpenGL
PDF
Apache
SMB
Zeroconf
HTTP
WebDAV
KHTML
Java
JavaScript
Objective C

Microsoft elects to create their own:
DirectX
ActiveX
C# .NET
Sparkle
WVG
MSHTML/IE
ActiveScript
Visua lBasic

Cool. Even more places for viri to attack

[Anonymous Coward]

The bigger the ROM, the more vulnerable and the harder it is to patch. What a cool target, especially if it does network stuff!

Trust ?

[SiliBelgian]

extensible firmware that provides the critical foundation of trust, manageability, and connectivity required for networked computing

Trust ?
Real trust or trust like in :
"smoking cigarettes doesn't cause cancer. Trust us."

Open Architecture always wins...

[i_want_you_to_throw_]

At least it always did in the past. MS has yet to learn the lesson (and someday it will) that IBM had to learn: you have to evolve from a company that sets standards to a company that contributes to them.

First Palladium and now this?
Certainly cloaked under the "benefits" someone at MS has thought "Oh a way to make *nix useless on PC architecture".
You didn't think this was just going to affect Linux did you?

Linux BIOS

[cbrese]

Maybe it's time to start helping out/using LinuxBIOS. I went to SCALE over the weekend and saw a interesting presentaion on LinuxBIOS, it has lots of benifits over other commercial BIOS's.

Phoenix has also announced

[mcc]

That to prevent confusion with the popular web-standard technology CSS, the CSS BIOS technology will before release be renamed to "Firebird", a name chosen after an exhaustive search based on the fact that it kind of describes "Phoenix" and hey, it's like the car.

To match this, and as part of the promotional effort for Firebird, they will be rebranding most of their products with animal-inspired names, for example renaming their remote-BIOS-diagnostics-and-administration technology to "Longhorn", a name to evoke images of stability. The entire promotional push will be branded to stockholders as the System Consolidation of Operations project, or SCO for short, overall an effort to draw together their product line for more clarity to consumers.

Here comes the Lock-In

[FunWithHeadlines]

Remember, folks, this is another step in Microsoft's plan to lock in users to Windows. As noted in this Groklaw article, a number of questions are raised about these Phoenix plans:

"Will there be Windows-specific APIs in the BIOS? Are they available to other operating systems? Are these APIs cryptographically hidden from reverse engineering? Legally, do these APIs belong to Microsoft or to Phoenix? Is this a loophole with respects to the anti-trust settlement? This raises a lot of questions about the ability of hardware that includes this new Phoenix BIOS to run non-Microsoft operating systems. Would they run? Would they be crippled it they run? Would Microsoft customers switching to Linux have to change hardware as well, if their PCs run this BIOS? "

Tread very carefully.

Useless layer of crap.

[aardvaark]

This is braindead. Introducing a huge layer of complexity between the OS and hardware etc. Really the job of the BIOS should be to do as little as necessary and then hand things off to the OS. Does a BIOS truly need a TCP/IP stack? Perhaps it is time to put a bit more effort in to linuxBIOS.

Prior art

[boatboy]

CSS is taken and is already confused by many a begining developer with eXtensible Stylesheet Language. Name it BIOS.NET instead.

great, more viruses!

[Saint Stephen]

Most of the viruses lately have been of the email-you-are-dumb variety. I'd been wondering where all the excellent boot sector and hardware level viruses of the 1980s and early 1990s had gotten to.

I couldn't stand yet-another I-love-you clone. I want some real destruction!

new BIOS features are a waste of time.

[ripcrd]

This is going to end up just like BIOS based Virus detection. To get anything to install on your computer you will have to reboot, enter the BIOS and turn this feature off and then enter the OS and install your app. How many of those BIOS virus protection features get turned back on after the first couple of times having to hassle with it?

If Phoenix thinks companies are going to pay for the digital certificate creation or whatever is needed to be able to install their app then they are mistaken. They should ask Microsoft how many software companies get them and keep them up to date. How many hardware vendors have gotten digital certs. on their drivers? Not many. As it is, we put the driver disk in that came w/ the hardware and move on. Or we download the latest driver from the net, install it and move on.

Just post md5 sums on the website w/ the driver and software downloads. Microsoft should build a simple MD5 sum checker that can be loaded from Windowsupdate. That would be the BEST thing they could do for security.

YMMV and if you break it, you get to keep both parts.

Where is the Kitchen Sink?

[Kindaian]

I want a kitchen sink included in the BIOS!!!

Really... why not scrap all that and add a JVM instead... That at least would be usefull...

viruses???

[Pompatus]

Here's the problem I see with this type of advanced bios. How long will it be until a virus is written that exploits bios code? Imagine the horror of having to flash your bios to rid yourself of the latest internet worm.

Do these people remember that BIOS stands for Basic Input-Output System? It is designed to be the foundation of the computer system, not the latest futile gesture to stop piracy.

I give the "security features" 6 months to get hacked, and then all we are left with security holes and bugs that could theoretically destroy hardware. This is progress?????

BIOS-OS

[mikeburke]

I won't be happy until my bios comes with a relational database, skinnable 3d windowing environment and a full J2EE stack.

In addition, I should be able to download bug fixes, new features and skinds from a website, call it biosupdate.com

Come on Phoenix, listen to your customers!

I'm waiting for... the real McCoy

[fruey]

I'm just waiting for the article where someone hacks one of these BIOSes to be a self contained web server serving off a ramdisk using just low level BIOS calls and the inbuilt TCP/IP stack.

Seeing that take a slashdotting is what we're really interested in... totally in the spirit of slash (TM)

Let Phoenix Know!

[jon3k]

It could set a good example for other BIOS developers if Phoenix retracts their decision and removes CSS from their BIOS. Please send them an email and let them know of your opinion. Whether or not you use, or would use Phoenix products, lets let other manufacturers know we won't stand for this type of activity.

http://www.phoenix.com/en/about+phoenix/contact+ us /

To: americas_sales@phoenix.com
Subject: Phoenix CSS BIOS

Just wanted to let you know ahead of time, that I won't be purchasing any product that includes your CSS BIOS, and I will go out of my way to avoid it. I will also make sure that any product recommendations that I make to my current employer will not include your BIOS. Just thought I'd let you know of my opinion, as a consumer, and someone who's owned motherboards with Phoenix BIOS in the past. I hope you reverse your decision, until then, I'll shop elsewhere.

Thanks for your time, and consideration on this matter.

Jon

Bah... they can try

[ymenager]

They can try all they... they can put all the DRM in the hardware, slap people with the DMCA if they try to work around it, that will only succeed in the doing 2 things:

1) [maybe] Raise awareness of the evil of the DMCA, and finally get it reversed.

2) [surely] Give huge competitive advantages to foreign companies that will start selling non-DRM enabled hardware.

Nowadays, how many MP3 players do you see out there, and how many proprietary DRM-Only players can you find ?

Also, how many non-US governments will tolerate having their hardware totally locked and at the mercy of an US corporation ?

OpenFirmware

[leandrod]

As usual, the ideal solution would be free firmware, but a big step forward would be the adoption of OpenFirmware, a Forth-based open standard already used in Alphas, Sparcs and Powers.

OpenBIOS

[Midnight Thunder]

You should also check out the OpenBios project. They are working towards making a working openfirmware solution that will work on the x86 platform.

Who is in control

[old-lady-whispering-]

There is no need to fear this. This is just a matter of Phoenix proving a market trend. Either the proof will be true or false in the end. Which brings me to this point "who is in control?" and I say whomever has possesion of a thing controls it. We will have physical possesion of the hardware thus we will ultimately be the most powerful factor in this market. We can exersise this power or not. Those of you who have been around long enough will remember the days when you could buy your bios separtely from your motherboard or gasp program your own. This happens all the time in the embedded industry (not as much as it use to though). So if the market is unfavorable to Phoenix's new bios and unsavory locks on our hardware we can always roll our own. Nay you say? Well I offer up these links for you to browse. Free the bios open the bios

Wrong view of trust

[TFloore]

The whole problem with trust is that I don't necessarily trust either phoenix or ms.

You have the wrong view of trust.

This isn't about you trusting them. This is about them *not* trusting you.

The entire point of all these Trusted Computing initiatives is that the software/content makers do not trust their users to follow the limitations that the manufacturers want them to follow. Therefore, they want a hardware design that they can trust to enforce these limitations.

Let me say that again.

It's about the content providers trusting the hardware, because they don't trust you.

You trusting them has nothing to do with it. Be a good consumer and buy what you're told.

Yes, this is the "customer as enemy" worldview. You are, by definition, the enemy here. And it says a lot about the limitations they want, that they automatically assume you will want to violate those limitations, doesn't it?