Slashdot Mirror
The Future of Trusted Linux Computing
ttttt writes "MadPenguin.org tackles the idea of Trusted Computing in its latest column. According to author Matt Hartley, the idea of TC is quite reasonable; offering a locked-down environment offers several advantages to system administrators with possibly troublesome users. 'With the absence of proprietary code in the mix users will find themselves more inclined to trust their own administrators to make the best choices ... And so long as any controlled environment is left with checks and balances [like] the option for withdrawal should a school or business wish to opt out, then more power to those who want a closed off TC in an open source world." LWN.net has an older but slightly more balanced look at the TC approach.
But Linux and most Linux programs are already more "trusted" then Windows can ever be. From being open source, how can you not trust it?
Did you even read the summary? Or were you just going for first post?
This is about locking down the workstation so that users can't monkey around. I do not care how well the code is written, a malicious user can create a security issue if he/she has the ability to do so.
See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
Or are the users getting their CPUs' source code and recompile them? Or at least call their LinCPUx fans to do it for them?
Trusted Computing requires trusting the CPU manufacturer in the first place. And in this world, where the telcos have disclosed our conversations to the govt without us finding out but several years later, can we really trust that the government hasn't pressured the CPU makers to add a backdoor here and there?
Trusted Computing is practically closed, and incompatible with the spirit of Open Source/Free Software. Ergo, Trusted Computing cannot be trusted. Sorry.