Slashdot Mirror


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.

26 of 418 comments (clear)

  1. The end is coming and people want it!?!? by garcia · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:The end is coming and people want it!?!? by tabkey12 · · Score: 5, Informative

      I think it is important that you read this document from IBM which points out that the technology they will be introducing will not lock you down to a specific Operating System.

    2. Re:The end is coming and people want it!?!? by rideaurocks · · Score: 5, Funny

      We won't restrict you to one operating system!
      You can choose from Windows 95, Windows 98, Windows ME, Windows NT, Windows 2000, AND Windows XP.

      Heck we've even got some old Windows 3.1 disks here if you want 'em. How's that for choice?!

    3. Re:The end is coming and people want it!?!? by garcia · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Oh you can boot Linux but you won't be using it in any useful way. IIS will dominate the webservers in the world because their's will run on the "secure global information network".

      Linux will fall into worthless obscurity because it will run on one of the various unsecure networks that the majority of computer users will never "want" to see. After all the only people that use unsecure computing are terrorists and those that are against the RIAA/MPAA/MSFT/GOV metroplex.

    4. Re:The end is coming and people want it!?!? by JWW · · Score: 4, Funny

      Of course 90% of future computer viruses will be spread on the "secure global information network".

    5. Re:The end is coming and people want it!?!? by demachina · · Score: 5, Interesting

      "Don't want to interoperate with the rest of the secure users out there? Don't use hardware that is tied to THE secure OS."

      If trusted computing reaches the point you can't get on the Internet unless you are running it, and at that point trusted computing means your completely relinquish control of your computer and your privacy, then maybe geeks should take this opportunity to start a network of their own free of corprate and government control. Think Pirate Radio except for the internet, the Pirate's Web, or Alternet.

      At least at a local level you should be able to create a wirless mesh network free of the shackles the government and corporations are inevitably going to try to put on the Internet in the name of "security", "safety" and to protect their monopolies on music and films.

      Its going to be a little harder to do the long haul part of the network, since you are going to have to do a lot of hops and latency will be terrible. Thankfully as disk drives and hardware get cheaper people can make liberal use of mirrors to that there are local copies of valuable stuff like Wikipedia and open source archives.

      You will also probably be confined to latency sensitive online games only in your local community.

      All in all I'm not sure it would be such a bad thing because:

      - It would foster a greater sense of local community involvement, which is sorely lacking on the Internet.

      - It would compel geeks to be resourceful and roll up their sleeves instead of just open up their wallet and dole out cash to the giant, abusive telecommunications giant every month.

      - I wager the Internet is going to be in a pretty steady decline in usefulness as governments and corporations seek to exert ever more control over it and try to extract subscriptions and fees for anything interesting, or saturate you with advertising. Its also a near inevitability that they will seek to wipe out bit torrent, all p2p or anything that is used by pirates, even when they also have legitimate uses.

      - People might start appreciating the value of the freedom things like open source give you once corporation controlled governments start taking them away. You usually don't value something until you lose it. Maybe it will be just the thing to ignite a sustainable and powerful political movement to regain control of our governments. As it is everyone is to fat, dumb and happy to do anything about it so corporation controlled governments are eviscerating out civil rights and no one give a damn as long as they have their porn, video games and reality TV.

      All in all I favor college radio, which is the closes thing to pirate radio you can usually find. They play interesting, eclectic mixes of often good music because they are putting out content they like, not content that ClearChannel and the RIAA want to shove down peoples throats and make them like simply by depriving them of anything better.

      Not sure that the Internet might not be rejuvenated if it goes back to its BBS, Modem roots. I wonder if spam, spyware, script kiddies and the like will be lesser or greater on the Pirate's net versus the "trusted" computing Internet. I wager the free lancers would be worse on the Pirate's net but the corporate controlled spam, spying, privacy invasion and intrusion will be worse on the "trusted" internet.

      I wager we can pull off an Alternet as long as unregulated wireless is tolerated by the government and continues to improve. If once the Alternet starts rolling and the government, corporations seek to outlaw unregulated wireless and wipe it out, then it gets to be more interested. Could we run a usable and interesting mesh network in the face of a hostile, corporate controlled police state trying to wipe it out.

      --
      @de_machina
    6. Re:The end is coming and people want it!?!? by arr28 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      See the Trusted Computing FAQ for the many reasons why this is a bad idea and why lock-in will in fact be a result, despite IBM's claims to the contrary. Written by Ross Anderson, Professor of Security Engineering at the UK's leading univeristy, this article is an excellent primer.

  2. How about... by turtled · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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
  3. Backups? by mattspammail · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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!
  4. Note to self: by Stick_Fig · · Score: 5, Funny

    Hug my mac tightly tonight, and trust it to only have one master: me.

    --
    ShortFormBlog: Writing a little. Saying a lot.
  5. **Ker-PLONK** by stevens · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...that was the sound of me moving from x86 to PPC.

    (As long as debian keeps up support.)

    1. Re:**Ker-PLONK** by avalys · · Score: 5, Funny

      Ker-BOOM, that's the sound of a mailbox exploding...

      --
      This space intentionally left blank.
  6. Before posting any comments... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative
  7. This doesn't have to be controlled by Microsoft by tabkey12 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.

    1. Re:This doesn't have to be controlled by Microsoft by pentalive · · Score: 5, Insightful

      When trusted computing was a USB chip that the os could ignore, I did nothing - my os did ignore it.

      When the trusted computing chip was needed to run Windows, I did nothing, I did not run windows.

      When the trusted computing chip checksummed the bios, I did nothing, I could still boot linux.

      When the trusted computing chip could lock out the bios or any OS not signed I did nothing...

      my computer no longer worked.

  8. Catchy slogan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Trustworthy computing... brought to you by a monopolist convicted using anti-trust laws.

  9. rms' writing about trusted computing by latroM · · Score: 4, Informative
  10. Nothing new by afidel · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.
  11. Re:Your computer won't trust you by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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 :: faster than paper
  12. Problem for Apple by vijayiyer · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.

  13. Re:Your computer won't trust you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  14. not a big deal really... by havaloc · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...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.

  15. Re:Your computer won't trust you by justforaday · · Score: 4, Funny

    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.
  16. Balkanization by Concern · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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!
  17. Oh boy... a secure PC, at last! by ka9dgx · · Score: 4, Funny
    I can hardly wait. This will mean I don't have to run a virus scanner any more! I can get rid of that pesky firewall box, and save some power. I also can stop worring about spyware, worms, spam, phishing, or any other nasty things that happen to Windows PCs on the internet!

    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.

  18. This won't make me popular around here... by Skweetis · · Score: 4, Interesting
    ...but I would like to see some sort of hardware-enforced secure context available on commodity computer systems. I would like the hardware to remain completely backward-compatible with all existing operating systems and software, and certainly not stop the owner of the system from doing anything they could previously do. I would like this as I'm working up a p2p MMOG protocol as a hobby project, with the goal of being able to host a world with tens or hundreds of thousands of users on minimal hardware by offloading most of the processing onto the network. Anyone who's played an MMOG for any length of time probably knows that this would be unworkable because of the potential for hacks that would give unscrupulous players an advantage. However, it could work if the networking code could be run in a sufficiently secure context, which I believe can only be provided at the hardware level. I would like to see something like this, as it could allow for MMOGs to be hosted with much smaller hardware and network resources, significantly reducing the cost to the player.

    Of course, such a system would have undesirable uses as well, DRM and the like...