Microsoft Kills Off Its Trustworthy Computing Group

An anonymous reader writes Microsoft's Trustworthy Computing Group is headed for the axe, and its responsibilities will be taken over either by the company's Cloud & Enterprise Division or its Legal & Corporate Affairs group. Microsoft's disbanding of the group represents a punctuation mark in the industry's decades-long conversation around trusted computing as a concept. The security center of gravity is moving away from enterprise desktops to cloud and mobile and 'things,' so it makes sense for this security leadership role to shift as well. According to a company spokesman, an unspecified number of jobs from the group will be cut. Also today, Microsoft has announced the closure of its Silicon Valley lab. Its research labs in Redmond, New York, and Cambridge (in Massachusetts) will pick up some of the closed lab's operations.

Comments

Mission accomplished

[symbolset]

Now that they have made all their software trustworthy there is no more need for the group, right? Declare victory and go home.

Trustworthy Computing was a sham

[TrollstonButterbeans]

And an insult. It was like Microsoft trying to usurp your own computer and tell you what it could do and spy on you too.

Trustyworthy Computing had the idea that apps could prevent you taking screenshots and assert insane privileges on your own computer.

It was offensive as hell.

Re:Good

[ihtoit]

yep, they're completely different animals.
Trustworthy computing: ensuring reliability and integrity of the user experience
Trusted computing: securing the system against the user.

Re:I've never shorted a stock

[Ol Olsoc]

Oh sure, a lot of people on /. would like to see MS crater; but be careful what you wish for. Do you really want AAPL to be the A no. 1 tech company for EVERYTHING, including your workstation?

I bash Microsoft here as much as anyone else - but No, I don't want Microsoft to go away.

I want MIcrosoft to stop making awful Operating systems. We know they can do it, because XP was excellent, W7 almost as good.

I want Microsoft to not have Updates bitch up computers.

I want Microsoft to change their "We know what's best for you dammit!" attitude, and ignore feedback. Both Vista and W8 had people begging them not to go there.

If you've read enough of Slashdot, you'll have noticed that every complaint about MSFT is attacked by "energetic fans" shouting that the complaint is invalid, that the person complaining is an idiot. How long is that supposed to work?

After moving to Unix-like OS' I apparenly stopped being an idiot, because I have none of the same problems I had on any Microsoft OS - and that includes XP, which I liked. Like I said, eventually people will get tired of that crap.

What I would like to see is a vibrant Microsoft, one that understands the customer, and the market. Why, that might even entice me to buy another computer with their Operating system on it.

Re:I've never shorted a stock

[Zontar The Mindless]

XP was excellent

That's what inspired me to switch to Linux full-time, I'll say that much for it.

Re:Treacherous Computing

[lgw]

Had TC been an open standard, it could have been a great thing. Think: locking down one VM such that no virus can taint it, which you can then use to scan the rest of the system with assurance that the results are valid.

But instead it was a joke. I was doing standards work while the TC "standard" was being hammered out, and while they were in the same Hotel as real ISO standards work, you had to be there from a member company and sign an NDA to even listen to the discussions. We didn't take them seriously (the normal ISO/INCITS rules are that anyone who shows up can participate, you only need to be from a paying company to vote, and that minutes are always public).