Slashdot Mirror


Pentium IIIs Banned in Arizona?

Ryan Radecki writes "News.com reports that Arizona lawmakers are planning to introduce a bill that would ban the Pentium III due to its usage of a serial number for PC tracking and identification. The bill would ban chips with serial numbers, computers with chips with serial numbers, prohibit state and government agencies from buying computers with said chips inside, and prohibit the manufacture of said chips in the state, which would be an intriguing situation for the two Intel fabrication plants located in Arizona. "

10 of 134 comments (clear)

  1. Sending a message by davie · · Score: 2

    This bill is probably nothing more than a message to Intel. The law would never survive a challenge in the courts and everybody knows it--they also know that lobbying against passage would be expensive, that the cost in terms of PR would be big, and that in the unlikely event that it became law, it would cost a lot of money to challenge it in the courts.

    My problem with this whole mess is: I haven't been able to find any details on the actual implementation. Would the actual ID be traded, or would it be used to generate a signature? Trading a trusted, indelible ID would only create a huge security hole. Once a cracker has your chip ID, he can spoof your identity and there's nothing you can do about it--you're screwed. A signature can be revoked, but not an ID. Am I wrong?

    --
    slashdot broke my sig
  2. This is all silly... by John+Meacham · · Score: 2

    The chip doesnt send anything out on the internet on its own.. no one is going to be able to track you for having a serial number on your chip... the only way to get at it is if a program running on your system gets it and sends it out... if big brother already has daemons running in the background on your computer then its too late anyway and a CPUID wont make a difference... also many devices have unique serial numbers such as hard disks. it is really useless to track a person or as identification because the plaintext is always availible to any program... software programs must do something with it and sofware isnt any less hackable because it calls this cpuserial opcode... its just a PR stunt by intel gone bad... they knew that it was useless for encryption and ID (its hard not to if you know anything about encryption) and that the functionality was already there... they just wanted to sell a few more chips.. (e-commerce is a buzzword) ha.. somebody got very fired over this. ah well... lates

    --
    http://notanumber.net/
  3. Do legislative bodies have technical advisors? by Fastolfe · · Score: 2

    Are there panels of technical advisors that clue lawmakers in on things before the lawmakers blindly make decisions like this on little, typically inaccurate, information?

    It seems to me that we shouldn't HAVE to bombard our legislature with corrections or educational letters in order for them to know the "real" story. If the sole source of information these people have is the mass media, we are in some serious trouble.

    And what about CNN? How in the world can they get off by broadcasting misleading information like this? Don't THEY have some sort of technical staff reviewing these stories before they're released? I think it's time we have a few respectable news organizations step up and admit that most of the rest of the mass media is exaggarating the problem.

  4. Brainless Arizona Legislature by sky · · Score: 2

    I laugh, sadly.

    I live in Arizona; used to work for the state private industry pays much better) and I can tell you that the legislature here is the absolute stupidest elected body I have ever had the misfortune to deal with in my life.

    Unfortunately, their advisors are no better.

    Years of futilely voting for the best person for the job has made me cynical, except in one key issue: I can usually predict the losers in elections.

    In reply to one comment, yes, the state government uses Sun servers. I personally know of at least five. This guy hasn't got a clue.

    Sigh.

    --
    Patrick Connors
  5. not likely by Lurking+Grue · · Score: 2

    There are a lot of tech firms around here. This guy is out of line. There's no way this will pass. I just wish that lawmakers like him would get clued before jumping in front of the microphone. Here's a link to his page if you'd like to (politely) let him know that this is a bad idea: http://www.azleg.state.az.us/members/ smay.htm Please don't flame, just inform.

  6. This is really dumb...this code shows why... by emag · · Score: 2

    Even though I'm not in favor of PIII serial numbers, I think this bill is pretty stupid. For anyone who doesn't believe that other computers have serial numbers, compile this program on an SGI or a Sun (probably works on others, but I didn't test it)...


    #include
    #include

    int main(int argc, char* argv[]) {
    char buf[512];

    sysinfo(SI_HW_SERIAL,buf,511);

    printf("serial number: \"%s\"\n",buf);
    }


    Hey, guess we need to ban most workstations too now, since someone could incorporate this code into a web browser!

    --
    "The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule." --H.L. Mencken
  7. Once again, lawmakers show they know.....shit. by Electric+Eye · · Score: 2

    I just love how these yahoos jump on a technological bandwagon based on some unknown or undefined fear and try to make a law about it as soon as possible. How many times has our Congress done this?? I bet you 99% of the dolts in the state govt. of AZ have no clue about this topic other than what they've read in the papers. Yet, once the privacy alarms were sounded, they hopped on their white horses.
    The point has been made already that Ethernet cards and several other types of chips already have IDs. I can see it now, the reaction from the stupid state govt: "What? Really? ummmmm.....Oh." (walks away scratching head) Let's find something a LITTLE more important to work on.....

  8. That's crazy by binarybits · · Score: 2

    I am amazed that a lot of you are actually supporting this. If the SN's bother you, you have several choices: buy a PII, buy a clone, buy a Mac, boycott, etc. All Arizona is doing is taking away from users and manufacturers the right to choose what products they are goiing to buy and sell. It is a horrendous violation of Intel's right to make any damn chip it wants.

  9. Solution: Consumer pressure, not Govt regulation by mlmurray · · Score: 2

    This is what happens when we relinquish our responsibilities to the government.

    The correct way to deal with the PIII serial number issue is simply not to buy a CPU that you feel comprimises your privacy. Believe me, when Intel figures out that the reason their latest and greatest isn't selling is because consumers don't like this 'feature' they'll take it out. I don't care what other motives Intel has for having it in there, they are still driven by the bottom line.

    When we allow the government to 'protect' us like this we are surrendering a little more of what freedom we do have left. Enough is enough.

  10. Cannot believe this.. but we shouldn't be suprised by tdsanchez · · Score: 2

    Stupid people trying to kill something they don't understand....

    Here is a copy of an e-mail I just sent to this representative:

    Hello Mr. May.

    Although I am no longer a constituent in Arizona, I did grow up and go to college there. I worked for Intel as a circuit design engineer from 1994 through last year, and I must tell you that your proposed bill to ban serialized integrated circuits is, at best, and uninformed attempt to ban a technology you do not even understand.

    Intel's press release that it's serialized Pentium III's was little more than a marketing ploy, albeit a poorly orchestrated one. I will not argue that Intel's suggested use of serialization on it's chips leave many questions regarding privacy unanswered but consider the following:

    1. It is quite likely that Intel has been selling (and manufacturing in Arizona) IC's that have been serialized for years.
    2. Other manufacturers also have motivation serialize their chips. Motorola is an example.
    3. Many other components on a PC, such as motherboard BIOS's, Ethernet network cards, and thousands, possibly millions of components already in use contain serialization.
    4. Most (if not all) software on the market includes a unique serial ID that is easily readable through software and can be used to 'track' users. Windows 98 automatic software update feature is a good example of a technology that already makes good use of this type of technology.

    The bill you propose could have the following consequences if, by some odd twist of fate, it were to pass:
    1. It would cripple the computing infrastructure of most companies, since the local area network (ethernet) cards would become illegal.
    2. The ban on manufacture of serialized chips would likely shut down operations of large portions of two of the biggest employers in Arizona, namely, Intel and Motorola, even if the aforementioned network card issue was given reprieve. Let's not forget ST Microelectronics, Honeywell/Bull, Burr Brown and Microchip.
    3. The ensuing economic disruption would surely cost the Arizona legislature millions (if not billions) in litigation defending cases brought by these companies, not to mention the economic havoc that would be associated with turning tens of thousands of Arizonan's away from their jobs.
    4. It would demonstrate that Arizona's state legislature is as uninformed and non-sensical as is sometimes joked about by it constituents.

    Sincerely,
    -name omitted for \. post-