Trusted Computing And You

sebFlyte writes "There's an interesting look at the Trusted computing initiative running over on ZDNet UK, written by security guru Bruce Schneier. He looks at the suggestions for best practice made in a recent policy document, and Microsoft's 'Machiavellian manoeuvring' to stall said document. He posits their moves are to avoid having to enforce such best-practice when it comes to Vista's DRM and other copy-restriction technology." From the article: "This sounds great, but it's a double-edged sword. The same system that prevents worms and viruses from running on your computer might also stop you from using any legitimate software that your hardware or operating system vendor simply doesn't like. The same system that protects spyware from accessing your data files might also stop you from copying audio and video files. The same system that ensures that all the patches you download are legitimate might also prevent you from, well, doing pretty much anything."

Comments

Let me be the first

[$RANDOMLUSER]

To say I don't trust "Trusted Computing".

Re:Let me be the first

[garcia]

To say I don't trust "Trusted Computing".

You don't have to trust it. I don't trust the government but I have to put up w/it. Sadly, that's what we have allowed the corporations to become.

Another layer of governance over us.

Ethics

[millahtime]

Well, trusted computing should start with a trustworthy company. That means good, consistant company ethics and ethical people working and representing the company.

Re:Ethics

[garcia]

No, it means that *I* control my computer and content -- not someone or something else that isn't under my direct control.

They need to stop fucking twisting words around because it's good marketing doublespeak.

Call it what it is. A fucking privacy and ethics violation.

Will people realize in time?

[rob_squared]

I'm seriously wondering this. Will people realize the things that Trusted Computing and DRM can do to them? I'm not talking about the slippery slope of "restricting" anti-government documents or mobsters using Trusted Computing to commit crimes. I'm talking about the loss of rights to use media and information THAT YOU BOUGHT, NOT rented, or licensed.

We, as computer users see it coming, just like a satellite sees the storm. We just have to keep broadcasting.

Flawed Argument

[DreadSpoon]

Your whole argument is based on the assumption that Windows would only allow use of locked formats.

Of course it won't work that way, it'd be corporate/product suicide.

However, only Windows will be able to use these locked formats. Which means that once locked formats come into circulation, you will always forever after have to use the Microsoft-mandated access method. Your old DVDs will still play on your new PC, and your new DVDs will still play on your new PC, but they won't play on your Linux box or your OS X box and so on.

Locked formats will be rare for years to come. It has to wait for market uptake. You won't see locked DVDs released right away, because that means that all existing electronics will be broken, which again would be corporate/product suicide. It'll be years after DRM is already integrated into those electronics, when a large quantity of the user base has those DRM-capable electronics, that you'll see locked formats released on a large scale. Years after people have seen no detriment form DRM and have already accepted their DRM-capable electronics has standard. Years after, for the vast majority of the populace, the DRM actually doesn't hurt them in any way, because it only stops the real thieves and the Free Software nerds.