Whatever happened to Microsoft's DRM plan? - Linux

This is a discussion on Whatever happened to Microsoft's DRM plan? - Linux ; "Early this decade, Microsoft weathered unrelenting criticism over a controversial set of technologies known as Palladium, which the company envisioned as creating a kind of secure vault to store passwords or medical records. Academics warned it could "support remote censorship" ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Whatever happened to Microsoft's DRM plan?

  1. Whatever happened to Microsoft's DRM plan?


    "Early this decade, Microsoft weathered unrelenting criticism over a
    controversial set of technologies known as Palladium, which the
    company envisioned as creating a kind of secure vault to store
    passwords or medical records.

    Academics warned it could "support remote censorship" and blacklists,
    likening Palladium to the Soviet Union's efforts to register
    typewriters and fax machines. Privacy activists predicted it would
    hand Microsoft "an unprecedented level of control" over the world, and
    free software doyen Richard Stallman solemnly dubbed it "treacherous
    computing."

    [...]

    "It's like a horror movie; they'll be back."

    http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-9976658-7.html

    -RFH


  2. Re: Whatever happened to Microsoft's DRM plan?

    * Ramon F Herrera peremptorily fired off this memo:

    > "Early this decade, Microsoft weathered unrelenting criticism over a
    > controversial set of technologies known as Palladium, which the
    > company envisioned as creating a kind of secure vault to store
    > passwords or medical records.
    >
    > http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-9976658-7.html


    Microsoft has "convinced a lot of hardware manufacturers to put the
    chips in computers and they're in a lot of computers, but they're not
    doing anything," Schneier said. "The question is what are they going
    to do with the chips? How is Dell feeling these days?"

    A Dell spokesman did not return a call seeking comment. Even Scott
    Rotondo, president of the Trusted Computing Group, acknowledges that
    the Trusted Platform Modules need more applications.

    "A lot of them haven't been utilized fully and in some cases not at
    all," said Rotondo, who works as a senior staff engineer in Solaris
    Security Technologies at Sun. "The supporting infrastructure has been
    slow to materialize."

    "It stands to reason that there might be frustration on the part of
    hardware manufacturers," Rotondo said, likening it to a "chicken and
    egg situation."

    "We need to really make use of these things before the hardware
    manufacturers get tired and take them away," he added.

    But:

    Asked if the world has been spared a Microsoft digital rights
    management machine, Anderson responded in an e-mail: "Wrong--WMP
    (Windows Media Player) and the surrounding stuff that MS hopes will
    enable it to do to the HDTV market what Apple did for MP3s."

    Saffo joked: "It's like a horror movie; they'll be back."

    --
    A farm in the country side had several turkeys, it was known as the
    house of seven gobbles.

  3. Re: Whatever happened to Microsoft's DRM plan?

    On Thu, 26 Jun 2008 14:52:51 -0700 (PDT), Ramon F Herrera wrote:

    > "Early this decade, Microsoft weathered unrelenting criticism over a
    > controversial set of technologies known as Palladium, which the
    > company envisioned as creating a kind of secure vault to store
    > passwords or medical records.
    >
    > Academics warned it could "support remote censorship" and blacklists,
    > likening Palladium to the Soviet Union's efforts to register
    > typewriters and fax machines. Privacy activists predicted it would
    > hand Microsoft "an unprecedented level of control" over the world, and
    > free software doyen Richard Stallman solemnly dubbed it "treacherous
    > computing."
    >
    > [...]
    >
    > "It's like a horror movie; they'll be back."
    >
    > http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-9976658-7.html
    >
    > -RFH


    It might help to understand the difference between DRM and a Trust
    Platform. DRM is intended to prevent copying, TP is intended to allow
    users to control access to their own data.

    Paladium was the most misunderstood technology ever. Yes, even more so
    than Vista. Palladium was not DRM, they were totally different subsystems.

  4. Re: Whatever happened to Microsoft's DRM plan?

    Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
    > On Thu, 26 Jun 2008 14:52:51 -0700 (PDT), Ramon F Herrera wrote:
    >
    >> "Early this decade, Microsoft weathered unrelenting criticism over a
    >> controversial set of technologies known as Palladium, which the
    >> company envisioned as creating a kind of secure vault to store
    >> passwords or medical records.
    >>
    >> Academics warned it could "support remote censorship" and blacklists,
    >> likening Palladium to the Soviet Union's efforts to register
    >> typewriters and fax machines. Privacy activists predicted it would
    >> hand Microsoft "an unprecedented level of control" over the world, and
    >> free software doyen Richard Stallman solemnly dubbed it "treacherous
    >> computing."
    >>
    >> [...]
    >>
    >> "It's like a horror movie; they'll be back."
    >>
    >> http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-9976658-7.html
    >>
    >> -RFH

    >
    > It might help to understand the difference between DRM and a Trust
    > Platform. DRM is intended to prevent copying, TP is intended to allow
    > users to control access to their own data.
    >
    > Paladium was the most misunderstood technology ever. Yes, even more so
    > than Vista. Palladium was not DRM, they were totally different subsystems.


    Don't all Apple Intel Macs have a Trusted Platform Module chip built-in?

    Steve

  5. Re: Whatever happened to Microsoft's DRM plan?

    On Fri, 27 Jun 2008 12:06:51 -0700, Steve de Mena wrote:

    > Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
    >> On Thu, 26 Jun 2008 14:52:51 -0700 (PDT), Ramon F Herrera wrote:
    >>
    >>> "Early this decade, Microsoft weathered unrelenting criticism over a
    >>> controversial set of technologies known as Palladium, which the
    >>> company envisioned as creating a kind of secure vault to store
    >>> passwords or medical records.
    >>>
    >>> Academics warned it could "support remote censorship" and blacklists,
    >>> likening Palladium to the Soviet Union's efforts to register
    >>> typewriters and fax machines. Privacy activists predicted it would
    >>> hand Microsoft "an unprecedented level of control" over the world, and
    >>> free software doyen Richard Stallman solemnly dubbed it "treacherous
    >>> computing."
    >>>
    >>> [...]
    >>>
    >>> "It's like a horror movie; they'll be back."
    >>>
    >>> http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-9976658-7.html
    >>>
    >>> -RFH

    >>
    >> It might help to understand the difference between DRM and a Trust
    >> Platform. DRM is intended to prevent copying, TP is intended to allow
    >> users to control access to their own data.
    >>
    >> Paladium was the most misunderstood technology ever. Yes, even more so
    >> than Vista. Palladium was not DRM, they were totally different subsystems.

    >
    > Don't all Apple Intel Macs have a Trusted Platform Module chip built-in?


    Yep. All the TPM chip is is a hardware repository for encryption keys.
    For example, it's hard to have a fully encrypted hard drive without
    something like a TPM (otherwise you have to carry keys on a USB drive or CD
    or something similar)

  6. Re: Whatever happened to Microsoft's DRM plan?

    * Erik Funkenbusch peremptorily fired off this memo:

    > Yep. All the TPM chip is is a hardware repository for encryption keys.
    > For example, it's hard to have a fully encrypted hard drive without
    > something like a TPM (otherwise you have to carry keys on a USB drive or CD
    > or something similar)


    Isn't the latter kind of what you'd want to do anyway, to keep the
    machine safe when you're not around?

    --
    Bond reflected that good Americans were fine people and that most of them
    seemed to come from Texas.
    -- Ian Fleming, "Casino Royale"

  7. Re: Whatever happened to Microsoft's DRM plan?

    On Sat, 28 Jun 2008 10:18:17 -0400, Linonut wrote:

    > * Erik Funkenbusch peremptorily fired off this memo:
    >
    >> Yep. All the TPM chip is is a hardware repository for encryption keys.
    >> For example, it's hard to have a fully encrypted hard drive without
    >> something like a TPM (otherwise you have to carry keys on a USB drive or CD
    >> or something similar)

    >
    > Isn't the latter kind of what you'd want to do anyway, to keep the
    > machine safe when you're not around?


    No, because the TPM cannot be accessed to discover the keys, and with a
    password hashed into the key, nobody can access it without either brute
    forcing it or knowing your password.

  8. Re: Whatever happened to Microsoft's DRM plan?

    Linonut wrote:
    > * Erik Funkenbusch peremptorily fired off this memo:
    >
    >> Yep. All the TPM chip is is a hardware repository for encryption keys.
    >> For example, it's hard to have a fully encrypted hard drive without
    >> something like a TPM (otherwise you have to carry keys on a USB drive or CD
    >> or something similar)

    >
    > Isn't the latter kind of what you'd want to do anyway, to keep the
    > machine safe when you're not around?


    I think there are two keys? I'm not sure.

    Steve

  9. Re: Whatever happened to Microsoft's DRM plan?

    On Sat, 28 Jun 2008 17:28:47 +0100, Homer wrote:

    > Verily I say unto thee, that Linonut spake thusly:
    >> * Erik Funkenbusch peremptorily fired off this memo:

    >
    >>> Yep. All the TPM chip is is a hardware repository for encryption
    >>> keys.

    >
    > Oh dear, I thought it was only your protégé Smith who feigned obtuseness
    > to obfuscate the truth. Here's the part you missed:


    I didn't miss anything.

    >
    > Remote attestation allows changes to the user's computer to be detected
    > by authorized parties. For examples, software companies can avoid users
    > tampering with their software to circumvent technological protection
    > measures.
    >
    >
    > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trusted...te_attestation
    >
    > This is an abuse of technology that violates consumers' fair-use rights,
    > that might (for example) be used to prevent making (or subsequently
    > using) backup copies of purchased media. IOW this is DRM.


    The article is little more than a panic monging piece. Like most
    technology, it can be used for good or evil. None of this contradicts what
    I said. All the featurss the article mentions are there to support the key
    repository.

    That has nothing to do with the original point though. Palladium was *NOT*
    DRM, and while the TPM can be used to create DRM, that's not Palladium was
    or is.

  10. Re: Whatever happened to Microsoft's DRM plan?

    In article <0f5ij5-48e.ln1@sky.matrix>, Homer
    wrote:
    > >> Yep. All the TPM chip is is a hardware repository for encryption
    > >> keys.

    >
    > Oh dear, I thought it was only your protégé Smith who feigned obtuseness
    > to obfuscate the truth. Here's the part you missed:
    >
    >
    > Remote attestation allows changes to the user's computer to be detected
    > by authorized parties. For examples, software companies can avoid users
    > tampering with their software to circumvent technological protection
    > measures.
    >
    >
    > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trusted...te_attestation
    >
    > This is an abuse of technology that violates consumers' fair-use rights,
    > that might (for example) be used to prevent making (or subsequently
    > using) backup copies of purchased media. IOW this is DRM.


    Oh dear, I thought only Schestowitz could cut so misleadingly. You
    listed one possible thing TPM could be used for. Why'd you leave out
    all the rest? Such as:

    * Identity theft protection,
    * Preventing cheating in online games,
    * Protecting from malware,
    * Protecting biometric authentication data,
    * Verifying remote applications for grid computing

    Note that the last is very similar technically to the DRM example you
    cite, yet is not a bad use. Indeed, it is a good use, as it would allow
    for more efficient use of resources in projects like Folding at Home.

    Basically, what you've done here is blame the tool because some people
    *might* decide to misuse it. How far do you with to carry that
    argument? Linux, for example, has been adopted by some very repressive
    governments, because they don't want to rely on an OS from an American
    company. Since Linux is being used to help repress people and violate
    their human rights, does that you mean Linux is no longer acceptable?

    --
    --Tim Smith

+ Reply to Thread