Slashdot Mirror


AU Government To Build "Unhackable" Netbooks

bennyboy64 writes "In what may be one of the largest roll-outs yet of Microsoft's new Windows 7 Operating System, Australia's Federal Government decided to give 240,000 Lenovo IdeaPad S10e netbooks to Year 9-12 students. Officials are calling them 'unhackable.' iTnews reports that the laptops come armed with an enterprise version of the Windows 7 OS, Microsoft Office, the Adobe CS4 creative suite, Apple iTunes, and content geared specifically to students. New South Wales Department of Education CIO Stephen Wilson said that schools were 'the most hostile environment you can roll computers into.' While the netbooks are loaded with many hundreds of dollars worth of software, 2GB of RAM, and a 6-hour battery, the cost to the NSW Department of Education is under $435 (US) a unit. Wilson praised Windows' new OS: 'There was no way we could do any of this on XP,' he said. 'Windows 7 nailed it for us.' At the physical layer, each netbook is password-protected and embedded with tracking software that is embedded at the BIOS level of the machine. If a netbook were to be stolen or sold, the Department of Education is able to remotely disable the device over the network. Each netbook is also fitted with a passive RFID chip which will enable the netbooks to be identified 'even if they were dropped in a bathtub.' The Department of Education also uses the AppLocker functionality within Windows 7 to dictate which applications can be installed."

74 of 501 comments (clear)

  1. Sure... by gregthebunny · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This needs a "goodluckwiththat" tag...

    1. Re:Sure... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      CS4 on a 1.6Ghz Atom.. good luck with that indeed. Never mind the rest of the "unhackable" stupidity.

    2. Re:Sure... by Spatial · · Score: 5, Informative

      For anyone wondering why that's so bad, a 1.6GHz Atom is somewhere around an 800Mhz Pentium 3 in terms of performance.

    3. Re:Sure... by Jurily · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Famous last words.

    4. Re:Sure... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      No, my Aspire One benchmarks about half the speed of my 1.5GHz Core 2 Duo notebook. So, it's more like the speed of an 800MHz Core Solo chip. The Atom performance is roughly clock for clock with a Pentium 3. I also know someone with a 733MHz PIII notebook and my Aspire wipes its ass with it.

    5. Re:Sure... by tangent3 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The main issue with the Atom is that it does not do Out of order execution.
      ARM processors do, so an equivalently speed ARM will easily out perform the Atom

    6. Re:Sure... by hawk · · Score: 3, Funny

      In fact, it sounds kind of like naming your daughter, "Chastity" . . .

      hawk

  2. Place your bets here by iCantSpell · · Score: 2

    100 worthless USD for cracking it open in less than 30 days

  3. Someone is gonna open it. by bertoelcon · · Score: 2, Informative
    It runs Windows.

    Your setup is flawed from the start.

    --
    Anything can be found funny, from a certain point of view.
    1. Re:Someone is gonna open it. by bertoelcon · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Your odds of getting broke by a simple script kiddie are much higher on windows, if an experienced black hat is trying to hack it all bets are off.

      --
      Anything can be found funny, from a certain point of view.
    2. Re:Someone is gonna open it. by pjt33 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Here though they have physical access to the device. You don't need to be an experienced black hat to take a hard drive, mount it in another machine, and modify /etc/shadow. Or possibly simply boot from a USB drive to do the same, in which case it really is script kiddie territory.

    3. Re:Someone is gonna open it. by cratermoon · · Score: 2, Interesting

      For computer security professionals, we might as well start with the proposition that it's already been hacked and start working on what the consequences will be.

  4. I long for the day... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...when Slashdot news beginning with "Australian Government" won't necessarily end with a rephrasing of "shows off its technological naivety".

  5. Same Govt. by retech · · Score: 5, Informative

    This is the same govt. that put a guy in jail on child pornography charges for having a Simpson's parody porno on his computer.

    Ignorance and arrogance seem to always walk hand in hand.

    1. Re:Same Govt. by rohan972 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No, it's not actually. This is the New South Wales government, whereas the "child abuse" case (I don't believe he was actually accused of distributing child porn) was the Queensland government.

      Wrong case, he is referring to this one from NSW.
      http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24771973-16947,00.html

      The case you are probably thinking of was dropped. http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/technology/technology-news/babyswinging-video-charges-dropped-20090909-fh33.html

      From a helpful Queenslander. :)

    2. Re:Same Govt. by laughingcoyote · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And, of course, since we're already into "thought crime" territory here, how long until they make it illegal to even talk about what happened (since you obviously must be thinking about the video in some way to comment on it, you sick pervert!) At some point soon, this will have to be stopped.

      --
      To fight the war on terror, stop being afraid.
  6. MS must have given a great by AHuxley · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Lunch or deal. Some state politician and/or bureaucrat must be getting a nice thanks later in life.
    The PR reads like pure MS marketing slop with a cute upgrade hint.

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    1. Re:MS must have given a great by kayoshiii · · Score: 2, Informative

      MS currently has the NSW school system eating out of its hands I remember talking to a highschool teacher a few years back who was sharing his concerns that MS had basically brokered a deal with them where they could not teach competing products. I have not seen the actual agreement so I don't have anything solid to back it up with.

      Reading between the lines when talking with the IT head of TAFE in my region of NSW basically told the same story. (We were trying to reach an arangement for Tafe to use some facilities we had for outreach courses).

  7. Too late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I just spoke to a friend in Australia.. its been pwned already using the nuke the bios and boot from a livecd method.

    They even disabled the RFID.

    1. Re:Too late by poetmatt · · Score: 5, Informative

      yeah, nuking the bios from a cd is ridiculously easy. It's actually a feature that people can do so. Hirens boot CD comes with very simple methods for that.

      I bet someone will just make an app that unlocks the laptop and wipes the firmware for them so that the laptops can have actual use.

    2. Re:Too late by Proudrooster · · Score: 4, Funny

      There were these guys that made this ship that was "unsinkable" which on its maiden voyage ran into an iceberg and sank. Compromising the BIOS in this case is analogous to the iceberg. "Unsinkable, Unhackable, Waterproof." BTW, isn't the Thinkpad supposed to work underwater?

    3. Re:Too late by wes33 · · Score: 4, Funny

      hey - some guy on slashdot said he talked to some other guy
      who Australia who heard from somewhere that these computers
      could be hacked

      It *must* be true!

    4. Re:Too late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      I am not some guy, I am Anonymous Coward, I have more posts than anybody else here, and I am a trusted member of this community. Your sarcasm is completely out of place.

    5. Re:Too late by NotQuiteInsane · · Score: 2, Informative

      BTW, isn't the Thinkpad supposed to work underwater?

      You're thinking about the Panasonic Toughbook. Weatherproof, waterproof, dustproof, drop-proof. For a while, British Gas / Transco were sending them out with gas engineers -- from what I was told, they used them for work tracking (read: glorified Filofax) and for storing gas equipment service manuals (beats carrying a dozen A4 binders around with you, even if the machine weighs about as much as a concrete block).

      From what I've heard, the US and UK Military like them quite a bit, and they tend to get featured in just about every episode of "Eureka" (the Panasonic badge is usually covered, but the Toughbook badge is almost always visible just above the screen catch).

    6. Re:Too late by ignavus · · Score: 2, Funny

      I just spoke to a friend in Australia.. its been pwned already...

      Australia's been pwned already!?!

      Well, yeah, any Aboriginal person can tell you that.

      --
      I am anarch of all I survey.
  8. Get me one of these and find out how long it lasts by marcansoft · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Tracking software embedded at the BIOS level"? Last I checked, those "tracking schemes" just force-fed Windows some driver/app at the BIOS level. Install any other OS and it becomes useless (not to mention that BIOSes these days aren't even hard to hack). As for the RFID, I don't see how disassembling it and taking it out is rocket science. Nevermind that the students themselves are going to be owning any kind of app installation protection in the blink of an eye.

    Sorry, using software to secure a platform against its physical holder has never worked for long, but even just trying to do it on an insecure platform like an x86 PC is beyond useless. None of this is has even a remote chance of working without the heaviest-handed TPM-on-CPU-die functionality and signing of each and every piece of software, but that has no chance of working because no one would want such a platform, it would be painful and expensive to develop, and it could never exist given the buggy and insecure nature of PC software in general.

    Video game consoles with strong hardware security and tightly controlled software environments with little interoperability requirements get cracked all the time to run homebrew and/or pirate games, what makes these people think their little netbook won't be?

    For what it's worth, Linux vs. Windows here makes little difference. The entire scheme is doomed to fail from the start due to the nature of a PC solution like this. Sounds like Microsoft just sold these guys a bunch of nonexistent security.

  9. Unhackable like the Australian Porn Filter? by dncsky1530 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Setting aside the fact that I don't think giving students laptops is the most efficient use of resources (smaller class sizes, more funding for teachers, arts and science programs etc would be better)... I can't help but wonder if this will be as unhackable as $84 million porn filter released a couple years ago.

  10. So stupid by GradiusCVK · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What is it with governments and hubris? If they had just shipped all these laptops without any mention of "unhackableness", you know what would have happened?
    1: 240,000 kids would have gotten reasonably secure systems with useful software on them
    2: People would have noticed how secure and safe the systems were, and appreciated the low rate of problems they experienced
    3: Eventually, some smart students would have figured out how to bypass all the security so they can play world of warcraft or something, but nobody would have cared and it wouldn't have gotten any press

    Instead, some asshat announces to the world "Bow to our unhackable laptops! We are awesome! HAHAHA!", and now thousands of hackers and security researchers out there have made it their personal crusade to find a way to totally decimate all the security on the box. You're right... It's gonna take about 1 month for an exploit for these things to make it to the front page on slashdot. Fucking idiots.

    Footnote:
    Yes, I'm aware that security through obscurity is no security at all, but that's not the issue here. The issue is that instead of nobody caring or trying to break the reasonable security they've implemented, now they've got thousands of people working on it. THAT does matter.

    1. Re:So stupid by Culture20 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Footnote: Yes, I'm aware that security through obscurity is no security at all, but that's not the issue here. The issue is that instead of nobody caring or trying to break the reasonable security they've implemented, now they've got thousands of people working on it. THAT does matter.

      Security through obscurity's little brother? Security through "meh"?

    2. Re:So stupid by GradiusCVK · · Score: 2, Insightful
      You do not understand me correctly.

      find all imaginable security holes in Windows 7

      No, they have challenged people all over the world to find all imaginable security holes in THESE LAPTOPS. Nobody cares about Windows 7, everyone knows that there will be hacks galore available for the next few years (though maybe fewer than XP?). The point is that they've said "Hey, anybody want to prove you're the world's greatest hacker? Pwn our boxen!". Guess what? Somebody will... and it's going to be big news, and the Aussies have set themselves up to look really stupid when somebody asks "So I thought these were supposed to be unhackable... how badly do you fail at life?".

      not sure, since they just recruited a lot of "free" (cost-diverted) man-power

      Hmmm? By your logic, next time I install a good home security system, I should go to the nearest federal prison and challenge anybody to break in when they get out? I guess that'd be free but.... I guess I still don't see the point of it.

    3. Re:So stupid by hot+soldering+iron · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Exactly. The purpose of any lock is to provide a speed bump. Hopefully a big enough bump that you'll decide the effort isn't worth the payoff. This asshat increased the payoff 1000 fold in notoriety, and social recognition.

      --
      When you want something built, come see me. If you want correct grammar and spelling, get a F*ing liberal arts student.
    4. Re:So stupid by ultranova · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Instead, some asshat announces to the world "Bow to our unhackable laptops! We are awesome! HAHAHA!", and now thousands of hackers and security researchers out there have made it their personal crusade to find a way to totally decimate all the security on the box. You're right... It's gonna take about 1 month for an exploit for these things to make it to the front page on slashdot. Fucking idiots.

      Perhaps. But then again, this is Australia we're talking about. You know, the country who's government is desperate to implement their own version of the Great Firewalls of China and Finland for whatever reason. Now, if some cyber terrorist just happened to disable to porn filters in laptops of kids who are at the height of puberty, and thus bound to use their laptops to download tons of it... Well, that would prove that just measures have to be passed, since it's the only way to keep children safe from criminal porn-peddling hackers, now wouldn't it?

      Never forget that your leaders are the people who came on top in a brutal fight for power. They might seem imbeciles, but they aren't. They are ruthless, treacherous bastards, both the economic and political ones. Never attribute any deed of theirs to stupidity if it can be adequately explained by calculating malice.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    5. Re:So stupid by Johnny+Loves+Linux · · Score: 4, Interesting

      >What is it with governments and hubris? If they had just shipped all these laptops without any mention of "unhackableness", you know what would have happened?

      Here are some clues for why they announced such a thing. From the article: 'There was no way we could do any of this on XP,' he said. 'Windows 7 nailed it for us.' *and* the cost to the NSW Department of Education is under $435 (US)

      Care to make a wager as to whether or not a certain large corporation in the Pacific Northwest gave them an extra special deal on the hardware & software on the condition that they praise Windows 7 over XP? I mean, they're purchasing netbooks and running Windows 7 on them instead of the lighter weight XP? Anybody else see anything wrong with this picture?

    6. Re:So stupid by macieklen · · Score: 2, Funny

      It's still better than security by denial (usually seen in mac users)

  11. Re:I dont understand ... by Alain+Williams · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I dont understand why this would be considered unhackable. Exploits have already been released for windowed 7.

    It is quite simple: Microsoft said that it was unhackable, so as far as the idiot politicians were concerned it must be true.

    What grates with me is that the Australian Federal Government is spending money training kids to use MS s/ware - something that will stay with them for the rest of their lives. The MS marketing department must be overjoyed.

    What education should be about is understanding, if you just train someone in one version of s/ware many just adopt a point and click approach with little understanding of what they are doing. You need different sorts of s/ware to make them think. Schools should use a mixture of: MS, Mac & Linux PCs.

  12. so let me get this straight by HangingChad · · Score: 5, Insightful

    While the netbooks are loaded with many hundreds of dollars worth of software, 2GB of RAM, and a 6-hour battery, the cost to the NSW Department of Education is under $435 (US) a unit.

    The netbooks have hundreds of dollars of software loaded and still only cost $435 a unit. So the cost of the unit is being subsidized and the department is hailing this as some big leap forward in cost of ownership? And some of the big changes are related to the BIOS.

    Already, the department has noted the loss or damage of just six netbooks out of the 20,000 rolled out since August - and have tracked one teacher using their device on a field trip in New Zealand.

    Yeah, really cool that the school can track and potentially monitor everyone using one of these devices, even if the machine is not physically turned on via the RFID tags. Now there's a big win.

    DET also uses the AppLocker functionality within Windows 7 to dictate which applications can be installed on the device.

    Even better. Add McAfee filtering to control content and MSFT's own antivirus technology...add up what all that would cost in a real world enterprise. Just the software costs alone would dwarf the cost of the device.

    I look at the cost of the device, the software and all the centralized control and think, "Or just install Linux and get 95% of that functionality right out of gate." And the 5% you don't get is the spying and monitoring part. What lesson is the school teaching here?

    This is certainly a win for someone, but I'm not sure it's the students and teachers.

    --
    That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
  13. Why? by whisper_jeff · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why would anyone issue a challenge like that over netbooks for students? Unhackable? Bullshit! Some hacker out there is going to take that as a challenge and hack into the thing in, I'm guessing, less than a week. And some poor student is going to have his netbook hacked because some nimrod decided to talk smack about how awesome-sauce these netbooks are and described it a "unhackable." Unreal...

    1. Re:Why? by MattBD · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't think too many kids will have their netbooks broken into by hackers - most school-age kids don't have credit cards. More likely someone will find a crack and release it to the world for the kids to use.

  14. Re:Sure, some will be hacked, by badfish99 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If they're so locked down that the students can't do what they want with them, then no, they won't. They will just teach the students to accept spoon-fed information and not to try to investigate anything for themselves.

  15. Haha.. no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    I work for one of the departments involved, hence the anonymous post.

    This is typical government posturing, and has nothing little to do with the what's actually going on.

    From what I've seen, the RFID chips are redundant, they're using the machine's BIOS UUID to track machines through software, I don't think they even record the embedded RFID codes at all, as that requires a physical reader device, and they're not handing them out to schools. Normally, RFID tags aren't used for anti-theft, but for inventory tracking.

    The BIOS tracking is pretty standard and off-the-shelf, it's not designed to stop professionals, but it will catch stupid thieves. Software protection is not huge, but most 'problems' will be met with an F12 network boot and a fresh system image, so the harm students can do will be limited and easily reversible. Students get limited space to save their work, and that is backed up centrally, so they shouldn't lose any data. On top of that, most questionable sites are blocked by the internet proxies, so that cuts out lots of potential sources of harmful stuff.

    Really, the true protection the laptop gets is that every student receives one for free, but a replacement laptop has to be paid for out of their parent's pockets. Students will learn to be careful with them or face punishment from their parents.

    There's lots of other silliness going on though, especially as it's my tax dollars going to waste.

    For example, the enterprise agreement for the Adobe CS4 suite was a big deal. They spent millions purchasing the software before anyone had actually tried running any of it on an actual laptop. Only after the government had signed the contracts did they bother, only to find out that the screens were too small. All of the Adobe dialog boxes were designed for a vertical height larger than the physical screen resolution, so the OK/Cancel buttons are cut off. The workaround was to install a driver that supports a larger virtual desktop and pans the screen around. It's hideous. This is what happens when you let politicians make technical purchasing decisions.

    Similarly, the laptops are rather anemic, which is expected for a netbook, but a lot of the software and content they want to publish is very video-centric. Apparently some types of video, like Flash content and h264, don't always play well, and high-res content is a slide show.

    1. Re:Haha.. no by MrKaos · · Score: 2, Interesting

      There's lots of other silliness going on though, especially as it's my tax dollars going to waste.

      I wonder how many 10's of millions of dollars will be spent on licencing fees? The entire infrastructure could have been built upon Linux distributions and tailored to the education departments requirements. As it stands I wonder if they even looked at a Linux distribution.

      What waste of money.

      --
      My ism, it's full of beliefs.
    2. Re:Haha.. no by Maelwryth · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "Really, the true protection the laptop gets is that every student receives one for free, but a replacement laptop has to be paid for out of their parent's pockets. Students will learn to be careful with them or face punishment from their parents."
       
      A couple of thoughts on that. The first is that my daughter went through six cellphones one year (not paid for by me). Children have no idea how much things cost because generally they don't have to work for them. The second is that the loss of your laptop (which eventually will be part of school curriculum, if it isn't already) will penalise low income families with no technical knowledge who now have to fork out for a replacement. The third is.....what a way to bully kids! Just smash their laptop and refuse to admit you did it.

      --
      I reserve the write to mangle english.
  16. From Lenovo? by DoofusOfDeath · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If I recall, China's People's Liberation Army is part-owner of Lenovo.

    Exactly why do the Aussies thing there won't be back doors built into the hardware or BIOS?

    1. Re:From Lenovo? by PC+and+Sony+Fanboy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If I recall, China's People's Liberation Army is part-owner of America.

      Fixed that for ya.

    2. Re:From Lenovo? by wvmarle · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If Lenovo would build in back doors, and is found out, then at best they go bankrupt. I think that is enough of a reason for any company NOT to build in that kind of back doors. And they will be found: non-standard chips present in the hardware are a prime target for further investigation, and BIOSes can be flashed (or, presumably, the original software checked against known-good implementations or at the very least decompiled for investigation).

      So even if the PLA is part-owner of Lenovo, why would you think there ARE back doors built in? Because that is exactly what you are now suggesting. And on the same line, why would laptops from US companies NOT have back doors? E.g. Microsoft, being let off the hook for anti-trust suits all the time, would have a case of secretly cooperating with the US government to build in back doors as compensation for being allowed to live.

      The only thing that can more or less guarantee no back doors is to develop it all from scratch by yourself. Then you have control over back doors present or not.

      And by the way what is it with you Americans that everything linked to China is automatically considered evil these days?

  17. Re:I dont understand ... by drsmithy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What education should be about is understanding, if you just train someone in one version of s/ware many just adopt a point and click approach with little understanding of what they are doing. You need different sorts of s/ware to make them think. Schools should use a mixture of: MS, Mac & Linux PCs.

    You seem to have severely misunderstood the purpose of these machines.

  18. Unhackable laptop? by Chief+Crazy+Chicken · · Score: 5, Funny

    etch-a-sketch!

    1. Re:Unhackable laptop? by Russianspi · · Score: 2, Funny

      Shake, shake, shake. Pwned!

  19. Re:Unhackable Windows by Baron_Yam · · Score: 2, Insightful

    To run a live CD of Linux... wouldn't the BIOS have to be set to boot from CD-ROM? The locked BIOS?

    So, now you're cracking the case open, and disconnecting the (possibly soldered) battery and hoping the BIOS resets to factory defaults that haven't been set to include the lockouts.

    Or, pull out the hard drive, plug it into another machine and do what you will - which might not do a lot of good if they've got the processor set to run signed code only.

    I'd try pulling the hard drive and cloning it then playing with the copy until I found out the limits of what I could do.

  20. Absolutely by GradiusCVK · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And don't discount the importance of it, either. All security, no matter what type it is or how it is implemented, is basically designed to slow down anybody who might try to break it. Indeed, security through obscurity itself does this, but the actual slowdown it provides is minimal, and it adds an extra cost: it is difficult to tell when somebody out there has successfully broken your security. By opening up, you can get a bunch of people working on your security to strengthen it, to help offset the few people who might be interested in breaking it.

    Anyway, why would you go to such great lengths to slow down any individuals who might see a profit in cracking your systems, then go and piss off a bunch of 1337 haxxorz all over the world and get thousands of them working on the problem in parallel? Kinda defeats the purpose of using strong security in the first place, doesn't it?

    1. Re:Absolutely by SanityInAnarchy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      All security, no matter what type it is or how it is implemented, is basically designed to slow down anybody who might try to break it.

      I think you're confusing real security with poor security. Granted, often real security is difficult or impossible...

      It is possible to create a system which is actually impossible to crack, short of social engineering or unprecedented changes in technology. Example: SSH keypairs. The last major vulnerability in this was due to a stupid, stupid flaw in the implementation. You can argue that such flaws are inevitable, but I'd argue that this is an argument about human fallibility, not about the theoretical limitations of a software system. Depending how much you're willing to invest, it's possible to write a program in such a way that you can mathematically prove it to be correct.

      The only other way SSH keypairs are likely to be defeated is when quantum computers become feasible.

      That said, I think it's unlikely they've created a truly invincible system with all the software they mentioned. There's likely to be a bug somewhere in Win7, CS4, Office, or Tunes.

      --
      Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
    2. Re:Absolutely by apoc.famine · · Score: 5, Insightful

      By opening up, you can get a bunch of people working on your security to strengthen it, to help offset the few people who might be interested in breaking it.

      But that only works for software you can fix, or you can get the vendor to fix. I highly doubt that's the case here.
       
      Nobody is out to burn my house down, because nobody cares. But if I go out and shout, "My House is UNBURNABLE....MUAHHAHAHA!", there's a chance that some asshat will put a torch to it just to prove me wrong.
       
      Security through obscurity doesn't work. Security through provoking asshats into action really doesn't work, unless you have the power to fix what they break.

      --
      Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
    3. Re:Absolutely by lukas84 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yes, but it's easily possible to completely remove admin privileges form users, even if they have full control over the hardware.

      For example, if you have a TPM and use Bitlocker, you'll have to wait for the next Windows privilege escelation flaw in order to gain admin privileges, which isn't as trivial as booting ntpasswd and creating a new local admin account.

      (Also, there are attacks against Bitlocker in TPM-only mode which include reading the RAM of the machine - they're even more difficult to do, and wouldn't be something a 12 year old could pull of)

      But as someone higher up said - putting the "unhackable" adjective on this seems like a typical marketing/manager decision - while it is possible to get such a system up to a very rational level of security, where most of the kids using the machines won't be able to run any third party software on it, it's impossible to avoid that it will be possible to gain administrative privileges on one of these machines - sooner or later.

  21. Re:windows "installs" applications by MikaelC · · Score: 2, Informative

    AppLocker restricts which applications are allowed to run, not which are allowed to be installed. See e.g. this review.

  22. Re:I dont understand ... by plsuh · · Score: 2, Insightful

    What education should be about is understanding, if you just train someone in one version of s/ware many just adopt a point and click approach with little understanding of what they are doing. You need different sorts of s/ware to make them think. Schools should use a mixture of: MS, Mac & Linux PCs.

    I think it's a little more subtle than that. 90% of the kids using these things will go on to be standard users in life, treating computers as one tool among many. Have you seen how regular users treat computers? Most of them are uncomfortable using a new app without formal training -- even today's twentysomethings. Even on a Mac (yes, I'm a Mac guy).

    What concerns me more are the other 10%, who will become power users, sysadmins, and developers. If all they know is MS and their pitifully low standards for stability, security, and usability, I am scared of the outcome for the next generation of software; not for the 0.1% of brilliant developers whom you can't keep down, but for the rest who grind out code in obscurity producing internal-use-only enterprise apps and vertical markets apps.

    I think of a kid in my son's Boy Scout troop who had no idea that "SQL" had a broader meaning than a Microsoft product named "SQL Server". He's a brilliant kid and will go far, but he needed to have his horizons broadened quite a bit. I don't fault him -- rather, I fault those who mentored him and didn't show him the alternatives.

    --Paul

  23. Titanic Syndrome by tverbeek · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's analogous to the Streisand Effect. And when the machines get hacked, the id10t who declared them "unsinkable" will experience Titanic Syndrome.

    --
    http://alternatives.rzero.com/
  24. There sure are a lot of stories on /. that... by Informative · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ... give the impression that Austalia's governors are stupid fucks.

  25. Physical access by GradiusCVK · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Well yes, it's a well-known fact among computer scientists (and apparently not by politicians) that the following inequality is a physical property of the universe:
    physical access >> root access
    What I was referring to was the potentially useful but soon to be pummeled security the laptop could have offered to students who didn't lose or wipe their laptops. Too bad too.

    1. Re:Physical access by v1 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      physical access >> root access

      Way I look at it is, if they only have remote access, it's possible to make it unhackable. If they have physical access, it's always going to be possible to hack into it. Maybe very very difficult, and possibly very expensive, but never impossible.

      Satellite TV boxes have been exploring this truth for many years now, they're probably the experts in the field. Right now what it takes is an expensive microscope and a lab. If they can't keep hackers out, what on earth is this netbook group thinking??

      --
      I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
  26. Re:Someone has to be the idiot at the party. by PC+and+Sony+Fanboy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Even in the community of nations, someone has to have the least competent government on earth.

    I guess the USA lost that title in the last election...

  27. Roku is a perfect example of 'Meh' by ezrec · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The Roku vidio player is an excellent example of security through "meh". It's almost an ideal box for a Boxee or MythTv frontend, but it is pretty much unhackable (cryptographically signed u-boot, kernel, and ramdisk). They've released their sources (but not their crypto key) months ago, yet not one single crack is available for it.

    Why? Because (a) they don't make a big deal of the security features to the public, b) it's stupid cheap ($99 USD), and (c) It Just Works.

    The combination of all three make 'meh'. Due to (a) there is no implicit challenge to the security community, (b) trumped the TiVo problem of trying to get 'more value for your money' out of an expensive piece of kit, and (c) prevents your Average Joe hacker from wanting to break a working (and useful to him) device.

    Good counterexamples are TiVo, Linksys routers, and the Wii.

    For TiVo, it was expensive enough that people wanted to get more value for their money, and felt it was time well spent to hack it.

    With Linksys routers, It just Doesn't Work caused people to spend a lot of time finding a way to make some perfectly good equipment work at all for them.

    The Wii advertised to the community that it was unhackable, which promptly cause all manner of security professionals to take up arms and figure out how to hack it.

  28. Re:Anonymous Coward by anarche · · Score: 2, Funny

    A country run by anonymous cowards...

    --
    Wait! Whats a sig?
  29. Re:Will they ever learn? by schon · · Score: 2, Insightful

    When the communities say I told you so, I wanna see Bill Gates cry.

    The problem is that won't happen.

    This was issued with great fanfare, press releases all around. What happens next week when it gets broken?

    Nothing. Nobody will hear about it. The government isn't gonna issue a press release saying "oops, we were wrong", and the hackers that pull it off either won't have the resources to buy a feed in PR Newswire, or if they do, nobody will publish it, out of fear of offending their advertisers (ie. MS.)

    It will be published on Ars and BoingBoing, and the people who make these sorts of decisions will never know, and continue to think this is what *they* have to do to make their environments "secure".

  30. Re:Unhackable? I'll take that bet... by Ant+P. · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Perhaps they meant "hack" in the original sense, i.e. you can't do anything useful with them.

  31. The Slashdot editor degraded the story. by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 4, Informative

    It seems to to me that, given the Slashdot summary, GradiusCVK is correct when he said this in his original comment, although he could have shown more elegant manners:

    'Instead, some[one] announces to the world "Bow to our unhackable laptops! We are awesome! HAHAHA!", and now thousands of hackers and security researchers out there have made it their personal crusade to find a way to totally decimate all the security on the box.'

    However, the problem is with kdawson, the Slashdot editor, not the Australian government or the article to which the Slashdot summary links.

    The article says, "[government] seeks to build 'unhackable' netbook network". The meaning is that the Australian government is doing the best it can in building a network.

    kdawson, the Slashdot editor says, "... Government To Build "Unhackable" Netbooks".

    kdawson made the title sensationalist and misleading. This amazes me: In all these years, Slashdot editors seem to have learned nothing about being editors. kdawson turned a wonderful story into a misleading experience.

    1. Re:The Slashdot editor degraded the story. by echucker · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I bet he did exactly what was intended. He created a story that would incite the summary reader to respond. More comments = more page views = more ad revenue.

    2. Re:The Slashdot editor degraded the story. by multisync · · Score: 3, Informative

      However, the problem is with kdawson, the Slashdot editor

      kdawson, the Slashdot editor says, "... Government To Build "Unhackable" Netbooks".

      kdawson made the title sensationalist and misleading.

      kdawson turned a wonderful story into a misleading experience

      Your obvious derision for kdawson notwithstanding, the "NSW seeks to build 'unhackable' netbook network" headline came from the itnews.com.au site, which you would have discovered for yourself if you had clicked the second link in the article.

      Your anti-kdawson rant also misses the real point, which is that this "wonderful story," as you describe it, is nothing more than part of Microsoft's Windows 7 launch campaign. The real story lies in this paragraph:

      incredibly, while the netbooks are loaded with many hundreds of dollars worth of software, 2GB of RAM and a six hour battery, the cost to the NSW Department of Education is under $500 a unit.

      Wow! That is incredible, and a real coincidence that this is occurring just as Microsoft prepares to roll out Windows 7.

      What you should be taking Slashdot to task for is allowing this advertisement - replete with Microsoft marketing phrases like "Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) " and quotes from DET executives gushing that "There was no way we could do any of this on XP" - to run, instead of an insightful analysis of what this little Microsoft publicity stunt was really all about. Of course your TCO will be way down when Microsoft gives you enterprise versions of their software for free.

      As someone mentioned above, this is a victory for "trusted computing," and other technologies for enabling corporations to control your hardware. Someone should write an article about that.

      --
      I don't care why you're posting AC
  32. I've used one by bbqsrc · · Score: 5, Informative

    Right, well, I actually attend one of the schools who have a deployment of these laptops.

    There's a label on the bottom that threatens you that if you steal it the police will find you. There's tamper-proof screws, so normal phillipshead's wont do the job. The BIOS is obviously passworded, and I managed to break the bootloader of Windows 7 by pressing ESC twice. No OS found apparently.

    For "secure" laptops, you can right click pretty much anything and run it as an admin. We ran cmd.exe as an admin to create a proper Admin account. Completely bypasses AppLocker. Apparently, according to the laptop admins, the government wont allow printer drivers that aren't already part of Windows 7, so no printing for you.

    The laptop maintainers don't even have administrator access. They have to box the laptops up and ship them to a centre to be "fixed", even if it's as simple as reinstalling a driver. Pathetic.

    It's only early days, and the nuking of the bios can be done easily, through Wubi or other means, but USB boot is disabled so you'll have to find alternative means. And I know it's likely moot to post so late after the rush, but I had to say it.

    Btw, it's CS4 Elements, it's not the true suite. And it includes Dia, the open-source diagram editor, which I found odd. Open source deployments always amuse me.

    To finish, Firefox is not included by default and has many issues when installing, as you don't have access to Program Files, so it confuses the installer to no end unless you change where you're installing it to.

    These laptops require ethernet access to activate and are mapped to a single username, so good luck using it if you don't have a Department of Education account. The all have filtering software so no porn for you kids, even when at home. Myspace and Facebook are blocked even from home connections. It's a rather horrible crippled setup that I'd wish upon no-one.

    Welcome to the future of computing. Homeschool your kids.

    --
    Disagree != mod troll.
  33. So much for Open Source by DaMattster · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Stephen Wilson and New South Wales were supposed to be pro open source. I guess Microsoft and a bunch of others ridiculously discounted their software again to get them to bite. Stephen Wilson was reputed to be pro Linux. I guess the powers that be got to him. Too bad, so sad. Notice how these netbooks are eerily Orwellian in their surveillance. Also, no computer is unhackable - given a short length of time, we will see the Slashdot posting that these netbooks have been hacked. The only unhackable computer is the one not connected to any outside network.

  34. From a Students View by LifesABeach · · Score: 2, Interesting

    OK, let's ignore for now, the "Un-Hackable" nonsense. What if I want to learn Physics Modeling using LISP? Sign Language? I have to go buy it? But it's free software! Wait? I have to wait to have some faceless multinational corporation "grant" permission? My homework is due next Thursday, and my teacher says, "no excuses". How about my paper due on Shakespeare's Histories? Bing says, "do you mean Shake Spears? Sorry, no matches" I can get extra credit if I make, and submit a short video on the properties of a Candle Flame; YouTube uploads are now blocked? What Educator said, "It's OK to only learn a tiny subset of knowledge."

  35. Hackable yes, but has a kill switch. by w0mprat · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "If a netbook were to be stolen or sold, the DET is able to remotely disable the device over the network. Even if the hard drive of the machine was swapped out or the operating system wiped, it would be useless to unauthorised users."

    It may be hackable yes, /. groupthink even posits how easy it may be. I think we've seen 'Windows' mentioned and somehow assumed they would inevitibly make obvious mistakes like allowing booting from usb/cd.

    They appear to have some kind of kill switch at the BIOS level, which sounds pretty potent and difficult to circumvent to me. I would presume when the stolen machine connects ot the internet, it calls home, if it's been nuked, it then bricks itself and refuses to boot of anything.

    Doesn't mean you couldn't strip the laptops for parts if stolen. That is if you didn't go the trouble of replacing bios chip (if not flashable)

    Despite that, they do seem to have to gone to significant lengths to thwart theft more than anything. However whatever IT outfit told them that the product would be 'unhackable' is guilty of telling lies, that kind of statement smacks of marketing department (not engineers) of some company telling it's ignorant client what it wants to hear (yet can't reasonably expect to get) just to get paid.

    So it will be hacked, of course and the blame will fall everywhere (ie students) except the marketing people who made the claims.

    --
    After logging in slashdot still does not take you back to the page you were on. It's been that way for 20 years.
  36. These machines will be as unhackable as... by PhunkySchtuff · · Score: 2, Insightful

    These machines will be as unhackable as the Titanic was unsinkable.

    All the Government are doing is putting out a challenge and ultimately proving that a committee of "IT Experts" will be no match for a determined teenage schoolboy who wants to look at porn.

  37. Radiation Myth Busting Time by Grail · · Score: 2, Informative

    We've been exposing kids to heightened levels of UV radiation for years by installing fluorescent lamps. I don't see any hue and cry about excessive UV radiation damaging our childrens' eyes and giving them skin cancer.

    We've been exposing kids to chalk dust for years, I don't see any hue and cry about heightened levels of respiratory illness due to chalk dust inhalation.

    We've been exposing humans to 50-60Hz EM radiation for decades, with no research into the effects of having that much electricity coursing through your body day and night.

    Why should we be getting all concerned about WiFi radiation?

    1. Re:Radiation Myth Busting Time by goldmaneye · · Score: 2, Informative

      Please allow me to enlighten you on the origins of cancer.

      Background: Cancer is an uncontrolled growth of cells in the body. There is, and I am oversimplifying here for the sake of explanation, one reason that this occurs: mutation. When cells divide, a lot of very complicated things need to happen. If any of those things go wrong, a mutated cell can appear. Cells are supposed to destroy themselves if they detect that something is wrong, but sometimes the mutation affects this controlled cell death, so they don't. Combine that mutation with one that causes the cell to divide very rapidly, and you have a cancerous cell. You can read more about the specifics of these kinds of mutations in this wikipedia article.

      Statistics: Cells have a lot of safeguards in place to protect them against mutation, so the odds are extremely small that any one particular cell will become cancerous. However, there are a lot of cells in your body. Estimates differ, but most seem to be on the order of 10^13 (a multiple of 10 trillion). So while the odds of one particular cell becoming cancerous are not very good, the odds of one of those trillions of cells becoming cancerous are much better. One "hit" (cancer-related mutation) against a cell might not make that cell cancerous; recall from the previous section that the two mutations needed are (1) the inability to self-destruct and (2) a propensity for rapid division. However, once a cell has a "hit" against it, it becomes more likely that such a cell (or its progeny, since they inherit the "hit") will become cancerous later on. This is why some people are predisposed to develop certain kinds of cancer: some of their cells already have one "hit" against them.

      Cancer and Longevity: Over time, those odds become more significant for more people. When people lived shorter lives, cancer was not as great a concern, because few people lived long enough to develop a life-threatening form of cancer. With life expectancies increased into the 70s and 80s for many people, the possibility of developing a life-threatening form of cancer has increased commensurately.

      Cancer in Men: This brings us to the most common form of cancer in men, prostate cancer. If they live long enough, most men will develop prostate cancer. This is because prostate cancer rates are primarily linked to age. However, and there are more details in the link, most men never even know they have it; you are more likely to die from other causes (including just plain old age) than from prostate cancer. That is why the fact that "in excess of 50 percent of just the male population will develop some form of cancer" exists: most men will develop prostate cancer.

      Personal Electronics and Mutation: The concern that radiation emitted by personal electronic devices causes cancer is still a point of much dispute and ongoing investigation. It is known that radiation damages a cell's DNA, potentially causing cancerous mutations. However, there are a variety of sources of such radiation, as documented on this Idaho State University webpage. This webpage from the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management further documents our greater exposure to natural forms of radiation (cosmic rays, etc) than consumer devices.

      So if the implication in your statement is that "from somewhere" must include the radiation from personal electronics, that can't be ruled out. But your statement is constructed in such a way as to suggest that the rates of cancer you mention are tied to the forms of radiation under discussion. Tha