Slashdot Mirror
Intel Launches DRM-Enabled CPUs for Phones and Handhelds
squidfrog writes "AP reports, 'The next generation of Intel Corp. microprocessors for cell phones and handheld computers will, for the first time, include hard-wired security features that can enforce copy protection and help prevent hackers from wreaking havoc on wireless networks.' Or more ominously, 'The same technology also can be used to ensure that content such as music or movies is used in a way dictated by the copyright holder. A purchased song, for instance, would not play unless it's sure that it's authorized and running on secure hardware.'" Intel has a press release.
Is that it will sell just as well as non-DRM'd hardware because the masses are clueless as to what it does.
We as geeks need to inform people about this thing.
Etiquette is etiquette. He kills his mother but he can't wear grey trousers.
Argh.
So will I now have to get a mod chip for my mobile phone?
it can be hacked.
Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
'The same technology also can be used to ensure that content such as music or movies is used in a way dictated by the copyright holder. A purchased song, for instance, would not play unless it's sure that it's authorized and running on secure hardware.'"
Right, unless you hold down the Shift key when you put the CD in... honestly people, as long as its digital, people will discover loopholes around the system and break it. I don't want to say the effort is pointless, but it definitely is a losing battle.
Generally, bash is superior to python in those environments where python is not installed.
How long before someone finds a workaround for these security features? Until now, no DRM has been left standing.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Now I can be subjected to the COMPLETE lyrics of "hit me baby one more time" once ringtone makers find this out.
Did you know that ringtone sales make up 10% of music relates sales now? That's a big number.
rejected (19) accepted (0)
Is there a psychological term related to getting your stories rejected on slashdot?
I always figured that no matter what the makers try, if the machine is programmable then a layer can be built on top of the hardware, a virtual machine, that can in effect incapacitate any DRM.
If there is some sort of foolproof hardware that can't be circumvented, no one has ever explained to me how such a thing could work without being non-programmable.
Maybe software could be written that needs to hook into the DRM to run. But software is crackable, or seems to have been so far.
Person: I think that I would like to buy some stock.
Broker: Well chip maker ***STATIC*** is doing well, you should buy them.
Person: What company? I could not hear you.
Broker: ***STATIC*** you know they compete with Intel?
Person: Oh AMD, are they doing well?
Broker: What did you say? I could not hear. Did you say ***STATIC***?
I'm certain we'd be seeing DRM built into our computer CPU's already as well if it weren't for the competition from AMD. I dread the day that both companies get together and say "ok, let's do this thing." Then we'll be fucked.
Of course we can always `vote with our feet' and just not buy their product, but as always with the slashdot BOYCOTT $insert_company, it is doomed to fail because the non tech crowd just dont get it.
Indeed instead of talking about it on slashdot (or other geek media) as I am now, we really need to talk to the MASS media about these things. When the EU version of the DMCA came out (EUCD) I put up stickers around my home town entitled `NO EUCD'. Perhaps people to whom this REALLY is worrying, ought to consider a similarly proactive course:
Write to your MP/Govenor, Write to the Times/Herald_Tribune, Tell your friends. And remember, `If there is hope, it lies with the proles'.
D.
use Blunt::Instrument;
By what? One person in 100,000?
Have you ever tried to solder the wiring of a cell phone... and still have it work?
If all Intel, ATT, etc., etc., have to worry about is people soldering their cell phones, they've won. And gotten a good laugh in the bargain.
Only Women Bleed (Sex, Sharia remix)
I know this comment will be modded down, but really why is DRM frowned upon by Slashdotters? Suppose DRM were required to prevent abuses of the GPL -- would it be OK then?
If DRM enabled devices will make content creators feel comfortable making more content available, then I'm all for it. Also, since theft won't be an issue (unauthorized copying) they won't have to try to recover their losses by charging more for the content.
Amazing magic tricks
From the article:
To provide system and application engineers the ability to fully utilize the features of the Intel PXA27x processor family, Intel is providing the Intel® Compiler and Intel® Integrated Performance Primitives, as well as optimized board support packages with drivers and power management software. Key OS vendors and ISVs like Sony Music Entertainment* have utilized these tools to create a comprehensive library of applications optimized for the new processors.
The way I read that, is that this processor has a few commands built into it that help make or validate keys. Notice how the DRM is built into the application and not the OS. The article also says this:
The Intel 2700G multimedia accelerator delivers DVD-quality video playback on VGA displays and supports a wide range of video formats such as MPEG-2, MPEG-4 and Microsoft* Windows Media Video9.
I take that to mean that it can do some key-type checking, but again - it's not part of the OS. In fact, the article also says this:
The phone platform supports full-featured operating systems from companies like Microsoft*, PalmSource*, Symbian* as well as MontaVista* Linux and Java* environments.
It runs Linux, so...DRM is already optional.
So, unless there's other documentation somewhere stating otherwise, I don't believe this is true "trusted computing" big-brother-knows-best DRM. I'd guess that the CPU has a few custom instructions that help doing RSA or something like that.
Weaselmancer
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
In my office I'm the guerilla marketer. I buy the latest and greatest and most useless tech and hype it up while I swagger around the cubes all day.
...A week later...
It's done like this:
"hey Fred, nice laptop!"
"You betcha Bob!!! This is the latest thing, it has DRM"
"ohhhh really!?!?" -- looks confused.
"Really Bob."
"Gee nice laptop Bob, looks like one of those new DRM models"
"Yeah, but none of my MP3's work!"
"But you got more features Bob... and besides, MP3's are illegal."
"Really???"
"Really Bob."
DRM on a cell phone? Was there a lot of ring tone pirating going on? Were people downloading MP3s and playing them when they received phone calls? Jogging along listening to the tinny phone speaker? Who's market did that effect and what's the point of having DRM on a cell phone?
I don't even see the point of DRM on a computer besides to kill the market. With music, it's always been easily obtainable. To make it the hardest to get and use on a computer is stupid. People will pick what is easiest for them, and that just happens to Kazaa. Remove the DRM on that crap. Most people won't pay for a crippled song when they can get the same thing for free. Another person will already make the copy, so crippling someone who has no intention of distributing it is DUMB!
That's scary.
8-tracks were so cool from a sales standpoint because as soon as the players were no longer made, you had to buy a new media player and new media.
Now that we won't fall for that again... if you buy a spiffy new media player what assurance do you have that it will play your old media, not because it's not compatable but because you only bought the rights to play on your old one.
There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.
Because _I_ decide what i do with the hardware i buy, nobody else.
Thats why i wont buy a DRM product, because i want control of what i own.
If someone else wants to retain control over the device, they can keep it
dit-dit-dit-diddit-dit-dit
brrt-brrt-click
"Hello, John?"
"Yes, John Ashcroft here...oops, damn, I wasn't supposed to say anything, was I?"
"wtf! What are you doing on my friend's phone?"
"Just remember, son, it's all Clinton's fault."
"Tell him he's either with us or against us!"
"Damn Intel!'
"That's what I say, we need better intel."
"Did he just say something bad about my intelligence?"
"No, Mr. President. So you see we'll be able to listen in on Iraqi terrorists like this."
"WHAT ARE YOU DOING? BUGGING CELL PHONES?!!?!"
WHAM! WHAM! WHAM!
"Ow! That hurt! My ears are ringing, have him arrested for assaulting the President of the United States."
"Oh, we'll get around to him, sir, we'll get around to all of them."
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
yeah, that's how it works in an ideal world. but then we wouldn't need DRM in the first place would we?
consider the recently released PC game Painkiller that contains SafeDisc anti-copy protection. this contains a blacklist. if you have any of the blacklisted hardware/software, the game won't run. the list includes:
-CD-writers
-Nero writer software
-virtual CD drive software
the net result: people who have legitimately purchased the game cannot run it. they have done absolutely nothing "wrong" in either the legal, ethical or technical meanings of the word. their only hope to use the product they have purchased is to bypass the copy-protection, making them criminals in the USA under the DMCA.
DRM isn't generally as bad as this case, but it is still fundamentaly flawed in that it can only work properly under perfectly controlled circumstances. that means saying goodbye to flexibility, and in some cases usability.
One may also entertain serious doubts about the airtightness of the CPU lockout. Other DRM platforms, such as Xbox, haven't exactly stood the test of time.
Ok. Now convince everybody who doesn't have a clue or don't care about DRM, to stop buying intel products so it will never succeed...<BR>
Another way is to buy the phone (since we may soon not have any non-DRM alternatives anyway), but just not buy any stupid ringtones and games for it.
These phones are usually sold at a loss, and they make their money back on the monthly service fee (which you sign a contract for), and on the sales of overpriced games and ringtones.
If you're like me, you've already figured out that, unless you want to be a hermit with no phone at all, it's cheaper to own a cellphone than to have a landline, so you might as well get that. But by not buying a top-of-the-line phone and getting a cheap subsidized phone instead, and then not buying the games and tones, you'll be keeping them from realizing any profits from this dumb strategy of theirs.
Unfortunately, while this will save you money, it probably won't change anything, thanks to all the stupid, mindless hordes of teenagers who happily buy all these games and ringtones with their parents' money. But at least you won't be part of the problem, and you can spend that money on something better.
If you have some cash, print up some nice stickers that say "WARNING: DRM Enabled Product. This device is a half-assed product" or something, and go stick em all over the products at the store :)
I've seen this sort of thing done to RIAA CDs somewhere, but i dont remember the URL
...is to understand that copyright holders have the right to dictate how their IP is used.
It's NOT a right! It is a PRIVILIGE provided by the gov't without the consent of the public. Not only is it a right to break bad laws, it's an obligation. The only way bad laws are repealed is through violation of the law. It is because of lawbreakers that we enjoy the freedoms we have today. If nobody broke the law, we would still have alchol prohibition(still working on other drugs). Blacks would still be riding in the back of the bus. Hell, the U.S. would still be a colony. But... if you're so dependant on the status quo, I can understand why you would say that. "Don't make waves."...right? Some people are just too comfy with the way things are to let a bunch of lawbreakin' hippies get in the way and try to set it right.
What?
Apparently the "Choose your own Adventure" series of books will also be implementing a form of DRM in their E-book series so that readers cannot just read all the way through. They will be forced to go to page 118 if they want to fight the DMCA in court or flip to page 62 if they want to download PlayFair. This, the authors say, was the "intended" use of the works and not to just be carelessly reading in a way that would violate the authors "rights" ..
The road between democracy and tyranny is paved with secrecy in the name of security.
Sorry, but the alarm sound is (c) Britney Spears and only your father had the rights to this sound. Your watch is now disabled untill you pay Britney Spears 50c.
copyright holders have the right to dictate how their IP is used. If you buy a song, and use it in accordence to the agrement that you purchased it's use under, you should have no problems
Who determines these rights, and are this rights fair and in accordance with the law.
On the other hand, if you buy it for your own use, then use some flawed logic to give it away to all your friends, well, that ain't going to fly. This is as it should be.
That's the thing you see. Some artists / peformers actually want you to crank off a copy to a friend and consider this form of distro free advertising. I agree if the artist / peformer doesn't want you to you should respect their wish.
It's neither immoral nor unethical for you to play a track for a friend. Nor is it illegal for you to bring your media over to a friends player and play it. DRM may have the unseen effect of actually taking normal tame use of our rights with physical media.
There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.
If Hollywood continues to influence hardware in its
country, perhaps this can make 'off-shore' hardware
even more popular. Along with 'off-shore' everything
else. Its very ironic that Joe Sixpack might need
a Chinese DVD player to actually do what he wants with his machine.
most people don't know what DRM is. As more folks buy this junk, they will realize the restrictions being put on them, and believe me, they WILL react negatively.(At least, that's the way it is in my fantasy). One of the reasons the laser disc never sold well is because it couldn't record.(Plus 12inch discs aren't too portable, which probably explains why DVD's do sell so well). Anyway, Let's spread the word, and hope for the best.
What?
How the fuck did we get to the point where music needs to be "secure content"?
What happened to kids having jam sessions in their parents' garages?
What happened to aboriginies hitting sticks against each other?
Or bands playing gigs in pubs?
Yes, these are careers and corporations, but just think about then and now. Music for the love of it then, music for the money in it now.
RIAA/MPAA & friends need to step back and take a look at what they're doing and requesting from hardware, software, and people.
'Thats they exact same thing a banana wrench monkey.'
Rightsholders not only want to exercise their rights, but also forbid you from exercising yours.
That is the true heart of the problem, and the protest. Personally I've got far more paid-for content than not, and I'm very willing to pay for content as long as I can make full use of it.
However, I am not going to shell out my cash for content I can only use at home, on a Tuesday, if it's sunny, and I can get my DRM-enabled software to work. Furthermore I'm unwilling to repeatedly pay for content every time the distribution method changes - ie: from tape to CD, from VHS to DVD, etc. I want to be able to make the choice to "upgrade" my media based on the benefits of the media or the media delivery system. There are real benefits to be had by buying my movie collection as DVDs, but I want to be able to make that choice not have that choice forced on me.
If DRM becomes ubiquitous then you can guarantee that content will be "leased" and not sold. The sale model will be deprecated and all your content will be rented on a schedule dictated purely by the rightsholders.
DRM means you say goodbye to the general purpose computing machine. It means you say goodbye to home-brew software, homebew hardware, homebrew content creation - all that creative endeavour becomes illegal, or impossible. No more listening to CDs of your friends garage band - they can't afford a key to "sign" their content, and your CD player won't play unsigned content, and the DMCA says you can't hack it so you can.
Fuck that.
Pierre
If you think about it most people don't want DRM since it doesn't provide them with anything useful. What DRM really boils down to in terms of marketing effect is that when Joe Moron discovers that his fancy $100 Radio Shack mobile charges him 10 cents in royalties every time it rings old Joe ain't gonna be mighty impressed...
DRM is simply bad juju, and people will inevitably catch on sooner or later.
Tin-foil hats are standard issue for all slashdot readers. Are you new here? ;)
This would open things up to content control.
If you have 'unapproved information' on your pc, ( that just happened to be approved the day before ) *poof* it goes up in digital smoke... possibly even notifing the authorities of the transgression of knowledge.
And in this case, you cant do anything abut it since its at the chip level.
Sure, *we* may find a way, but the general public will have its core knowledge controlled and restricted.
Don't count on buying others chips.. they will all follow suit to 'keep up' with markets.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
You can't emulate a private key that you don't have.
DRM would help the legitimate user here. None of those applications would have the ability to assist in copying and that DRM protected game.
additionally by my understanding of TCPA, DRMed applications cannot necessarily be aware of another application's mere EXISTENCE on a PC unless there is a granted trust relationship between the programs. And if Nero (DRM enabled or not) can't make a usable copy of a DRMed game on a DRM system, they have no motivation to go the extra step and request that trust relationship with those applications.
I think there are quite a few advantages to DRM, but to many people (myself included) the lack of control over one's own machine is disconcerting. But in this case, a law-abiding user wouldn't have a problem on a DRM system.
PXA-27x is the model number^Wname. The product name is XScale, ie it is an intel XScale CPU, PXA-27x model family, compared to previous models (families) of the XScale CPU such as the PXA-25x and PXA-21x. All of which essentially are revisions of the DEC SA-1100 StrongARM which intel acquired design rights to as part of DEC's sell-out to^W^Wsettlement from intel.
I use Friend/Foe + mod-point modifiers as a karma/reputation system.
Now what it means is that whenever your phone rings, $699 is charged in your phone bill for royalty for public preformance.
Sometimes I wish I was a plumber, then I'd know how to deal with other people's shit.
But in this case, a law-abiding user wouldn't have a problem on a DRM system.
Right. Except for all of the OTHER cases where a law-abiding user WOULD have a problem with a DRM system.
Such as when he wants to make perfectly legal backup copies. Or when he wants to make perfectly legal educational-related use. Or perfectly legal research use. Or a perfectly legal parody. Or perfectly legally use it on different hardware. Or perform perfectly legal reverse engineering. Pretty much any personal use. The list just goes on and on. All legal uses obstructed by DRM.
TCPA
The entire foundation of TCPA/Palladium/NaGSCaB or any other Trusted Computing system is the assumption that YOUR Trust chip will not let YOU know what YOUR master key is. It's your property and you have every right to rip it open and look at it under a microscope to see what your key is. And once you've done that the entire Trust system falls apart.
Once you know your key you are able to make all of the perfectly legal uses I listed above. And yes, you are also able to commit copyright infringment.
The point is that you can't put an innocent person in prison (one who has NOT commited copyright infringment) for those perfectly legal activities simply becuase it means he could - but DIDN'T - commit infringment. And if you don't imprison those innocent people then the DRM system has no legal protection and is worthless.
The only way to protect DRM is to imprison innocent people. If you want to go after people who commit infringment, then fine. But you can't protect DRM itself. That happens to make the DRM worthless, oh well, the DRM is worthless.
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
The trick lies in the fact that since it can't tell the difference between a ripped DiVX and your home movies it will just not play either of them.
/. protocol, but I speculate that this (if it is really DRM as we have come to understand it) will be how they do it. Unless it is trusted media, and can be verified to be legally playable (licensed) by you it will not play.
I did not RTFA, per
That is the crux of the matter with DRM, especially to me. DRM is fine, but the fact that my own music I produce won't play on such players without the DRM key/watermark (which I assume I'd have to pay for, per client license or a whole lump sum i could never afford...perhaps both) then I am once again ousted from the music industry market. But not because of lack of equipment, lack of songs, or lack of proper know-how to get these things available online...but because I lack the $$$ required to secure my music as 'trusted'...*bam*, RIAA distro monopoly back in business.