Major PC Makers Adopt Trusted Computing Schema
An anonymous reader wrote to let us known about a News.com story regarding so-called trusted computing, and its adoption by the major PC manufacturers. From the article: "The three largest computer makers--Dell, Hewlett-Packard and IBM--have started selling desktops and notebooks with so-called trusted computing hardware, which allows security-sensitive applications to lock down data to a specific PC." Interestingly, while Microsoft is said to be behind the idea support won't be forthcoming for trusted computing until they release Longhorn next year, making this a hardware-vendor lead initiative.
At the time, digital-rights advocates raised concerns that the technology could be used by software makers and media companies to control people's PCs, putting Microsoft on the defensive. The dispute even led the software giant to change the name of its technology from Palladium to the Next-Generation Secure Computing Base, or NGSCB.
And yes, we all know that now that the name of their security technology is different Microsoft can't "team up" with the hardware makers to lock down PCs to a single OS. It wouldn't be in the best interests of either side to do that right? Oh wait, MSFT already has contractual agreements that basically force this to happen why not take it a step further and make people not only pay extra for the OS pre-installed/distributed w/the PC but also make them have no choice but to run it once they get it.
I love the wording in the article... Oooh it's the hardware vendors taking the initiative and not Microsoft (like Microsoft is always at the forefront of technology or something). Is that supposed to make me feel better that the entire computing platform will be locked down leading to the end of free distribution of anything, the Internet as we know it, etc?
Didn't Ben Franklin say something about this? Yeah.
How about trusted users? The computers aren't the problem, it's the users. It takes a confident voice to say, I'm person X and I am working on the mainframe, I need your username and password. Big words like mainframe scare people. People can't be trusted.
"I cannot think of any need in childhood as strong as the need for a father's protection." -- Sigmund Freud
What happens when your PC dies? How do you recover using the now useless backups? There's bound to be a way to bypass that. Sounds like the data requires a physical key (sentry?). Someone somehow will bypass it.
Now accepting PayPal donations!
Hug my mac tightly tonight, and trust it to only have one master: me.
ShortFormBlog: Writing a little. Saying a lot.
...that was the sound of me moving from x86 to PPC.
(As long as debian keeps up support.)
http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14/tcpa-faq.html
this: http://www.gentoo.org/news/20050202-trustedgentoo. xml and, linked from there, this:
http://www.research.ibm.com/gsal/tcpa/tcpa_rebutta l.pdf
If Linux gets in on the game then surely this could be a positive thing for computer users.
See the Trusted Gentoo project for example.
Until we see locked down BIOSes then this is hardly a threat to Linux if it responds quickly.
Get a free iPod Nano 4GB!
Trustworthy computing... brought to you by a monopolist convicted using anti-trust laws.
rms on trusted computing
IBM has had the hardware in place in their laptop line for the last several years. It makes repairs which require a motherboard swap a PITA because you have to be sure to order the part with the crypto in place if your current system had one, which might not know about the first time you do one, resulting in a several day delay....
There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
I don't care about that mp3 file, or that movie.
I care about a future where I am still able to download, modify and share OSS software.
If executables have to be validated and signed for trustworthyness, then everyone will need to compile their own.
The "legit" version of firefox may work, but modify the source and compile your own, and it won't play in your windows system. Don't even think of taking it to your friends' house.
(somebody please tell me I am wrong about this)
liqbase
This sort of crap runs contrary to Apple's philosophy, and I don't think they'll want it in their hardware (heck, they don't even copy protect their OS). However, they may get forced into it for compatibility. I believe in trusted computing - I trust myself not to be dumb.
Notice the "safety in numbers" flocking together of these vendors. None of them dare take such a step alone, because they know damned well that the publicity will be bad... and people won't buy their hardware. But put together and nice consortium of the largest hardware makers... and boom, everything's ok and fuck the consumer since he no longer has much choice.
...this is something that businesses want (ones that already control your computing environment, like at work), and I really don't see it being aimed at the typical consumer.
I would also say that there will always be a market for open computers. The market always has ways around this.
So if you want your computer to have to ability to say to you, "Sorry, I won't play that MP3 file" or "Sorry, that movie is not authorized for this PC," well step right up.
Well, I'll buy it only if it says those things in that cool HAL 9000 voice...
I'll turn into a supernova and burn up everything. Well I'll turn into a black little hole and you'll turn into string.
I don't know how thoroughly we've all digested it yet, but open source has arrived, and in addition to changing what people expect of their software, it has raised the bar considerably for corporations like Microsoft. It is already eating their breakfast in the server space, and it is growing to the point where in a few more years there is potential to threaten their client desktops as well, starting with businesses and other large, lucrative deployments. We as an industry are starting to recognize, and ultimatly demand, the benefits of freedom.
On the one hand I like Microsoft buying into the wild-eyed "Alamo" mentality of the content trust, trying to arm wrestle every customer for control, because the more aggressive they get with Digital Restrictions Management, the more it will drive everyone into the arms of competitors, including open and free software.
I wish I could say I thought trusted computing was doomed to fail, but frankly I think it can be considerably successful. If the end result is that your computer is not managed by you, and 3rd parties like Microsoft can take the XBox busines model (and probably, simplicity of interface) deeper into PC territory, this is probably a relief for a variety of consumers beleaguered with "general purpose" computing and all that it entails, viruses, spyware, etc. Better software architecture could solve their problems, but outside control can solve it almost as well.
I guess what will ultimately happen is balkanization, as more aggressive attempts at controlling the platform will split consumers into low and high ends. At the low end, the "game console" converges into a media system and a simple home computer, where every application is trusted and the vendor is the gatekeeper. They'll be happier because, like video consoles today, the hardware is cheap and the costs are deferred into the software and services. At the high end, the general purpose PC that is currently a staple in the home will fade into niche status - a tool for hobbyists and professionals. What fills the void in between, in the end, is hopefully a free-software-based system that is simple enough for all consumers to use, that provides them with an alternative to commercial products, perhaps marketed by a white knight corporation much as IBM has taken free software to the server world.
Tired of Political Trolls? Opt Out!
It's going to be so nice, knowing that my data in my PC can't be taken away, erased, trashed, or otherwise caused to be lost. This will keep my stuff secure, for me.
Finally, I'll be able to trust my computer.
Of course, such a system would have undesirable uses as well, DRM and the like...