Slashdot Mirror
ISP Restrictions Based on Hardware/Software?
An anonymous reader writes "IT Architect magazine is reporting that ISPs are working towards a greater restriction of a customer's right to run what may be 'insecure' software. From the article: 'A greater threat is that ISPs may try to restrict the customer's side by denying access to machines based on their hardware or software configuration. [...] former head of cybersecurity, White House terrorism advisor Richard Clarke even said it should be made mandatory to quarantine malware.' Something that may also come as a surprise to some is that Microsoft is completely against this censorship of internet access. 'According to Chief Privacy Officer Peter Cullen, Microsoft is against ISPs doing anything that would restrict customers' choice of software. And he says this isn't just about the impracticability of demanding that data centers patch everything on the second Tuesday of the month. Laptop and home users also have the right to run an insecure PC.'"
"No matter how much Microsoft tries, it's always hard to configure a Windows system to be both secure and capable of easily running the software most users want to run without glitches."
Maybe for a programmer, but for people that follow directions (they even force you to run a wizard when you install XP SP2) it's pretty easy. As a matter of fact I had a server running Windows 2000 Server sitting in an unprotected DMZ for almost three years and I never had any issues. Lest you say I'm a trained user (and I am) I'll give my parents as an example. If the icon is not on the desktop, the computer does not do it. They have managed to stay virus and spyware free despite my father's best efforts to the contrary.
Hell, even the most despised ISP in the world does a better job of protecting home systems than most of the people dabbling with *NIX at home. The only thing that keeps the hundreds of distros out there from being the next target is the fact that nobody wants to write a trojan for 5 PC's. I've been in the industry for longer than some (most?) people here have been alive and I've never seen a "home" system so hard for people to use as the maintream Linux distros. The only step in the right direction was Lindows - but it lacked a way to get around the "Microsoft Bob" aspects and lacked mainstream support because all the Linux geeks out there were too good to touch a Lindows system - hobby OS syndrome at work again.
What's my flavor of choice? Well I have a switchbox and hooked to it are a BSD, Debian, AIX and an XP laptop. They all do certain things very well. The important question is what do I install for family when I never want to come back? The answer is simple, a patched XP installation, scheduled to install system, AV and spyware updates automatically.
"Hard" is hardly how I would describe making a secure Windows installation. "Hard" is how I would describe a new Linux user's experience is the first time he or she is presented with a notice that he or she is missing a whole list of dependencies. It's a tossup actually ... it's either that or the warm
welcome they receive when they stumble upon some sort of support web forum or
mailing list and fail to read the FAQ.
Back to the subject at hand - it will never happen, at least not as described. What I can see is a router lockout of a system that is found to be broadcasting a worm or trojan, regardless of the OS. This is a common practice in many companies these days and is becoming more common all the time. It's the smart thing to do and some form of this will definitely make it's way to the mainstream ISP's because people will demand it.
I wouldn't worry about that, were I you. The TPM chip will take care of all that. Whatever residual rights you/we have will be transferred to whomever has access to the TPM module ... which will not include us. We'll be "safe in the loving hands" of Disney, MS, INTEL. SONY, IBM, AMD, our ISP's, whatever political party is in control,... etc.
... Be Happy! And get ready to consume more than you ever dreamed of... whether you want to or not.
Don't worry
Seriously, although no fan of Windows, you should have the right to use it. I think it's a bad choice, but it should be your choice to make. Period.
If you want your life to be different, live it differently.