Where will our security be in a couple of years? tcpa - PGP

This is a discussion on Where will our security be in a couple of years? tcpa - PGP ; -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 I have been reading about the next windows operating system and a chip that will be built into the motherboard of future computers that work together to pratically give control of your computer to ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: Where will our security be in a couple of years? tcpa

  1. Where will our security be in a couple of years? tcpa

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    I have been reading about the next windows operating system and a
    chip that will be built into the motherboard of future computers that
    work together to pratically give control of your computer to
    microsoft, authors of software that you install and possibly the
    goons. So in case you didn't know one possible future, you might
    want to be ready.


    One link I found pretty informative is:
    http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14/tcpa-faq.html

    The specs on the "fritz" chip that the trusted computing platform
    alliance wants to put in all computers:
    http://www.atmel.com/atmel/acrobat/2015s.pdf

    If you just want to find your own links on this subject just use a
    search engine with the words 'tcpa' and 'palladium' included.

    How secure will PGP be if we had TC computers? I think George Orwell
    may be been only 20 yrs off on the time setting of his book when I
    read about this step towards that kind of situation.

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: PGP 8.0.2

    iQA/AwUBP2VMalZSS/ThB8/EEQKy7ACghjRpeDgyazaoh9JBKLKbYuf2FqsAoMwx
    599DNJ8D8FK1yuU+PRC/cqf1
    =ij61
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


  2. Re: Where will our security be in a couple of years? tcpa

    I can't see this sort of thing happening.

    Remember the controversy over the unique serial numbers Intel embedded in
    some CPUs a while ago? Customer reaction stopped it.

    Microsoft are like Intel. They dominate their market but they don't enjoy a
    total monopoly. If they try to impose this fritz chip their customers will
    simply go elsewhere and start using other hardware and operating systems. I
    bet Red Hat and Apple will be delighted if Microsoft tries something like
    this. Can you imagine government organisations or big companies buying
    hardware and software that sends information to who knows where without any
    user authorisation?

    I'd be interested to hear other opinions about this.

    Richard

    "trax" wrote in message
    news:aneamvsb58r0u6tmg1vuckr7v7d9ppsiii@4ax.com...
    > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    > Hash: SHA1
    >
    > I have been reading about the next windows operating system and a
    > chip that will be built into the motherboard of future computers that
    > work together to pratically give control of your computer to
    > microsoft, authors of software that you install and possibly the
    > goons. So in case you didn't know one possible future, you might
    > want to be ready.
    >
    >
    > One link I found pretty informative is:
    > http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14/tcpa-faq.html
    >
    > The specs on the "fritz" chip that the trusted computing platform
    > alliance wants to put in all computers:
    > http://www.atmel.com/atmel/acrobat/2015s.pdf
    >
    > If you just want to find your own links on this subject just use a
    > search engine with the words 'tcpa' and 'palladium' included.
    >
    > How secure will PGP be if we had TC computers? I think George Orwell
    > may be been only 20 yrs off on the time setting of his book when I
    > read about this step towards that kind of situation.
    >
    > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    > Version: PGP 8.0.2
    >
    > iQA/AwUBP2VMalZSS/ThB8/EEQKy7ACghjRpeDgyazaoh9JBKLKbYuf2FqsAoMwx
    > 599DNJ8D8FK1yuU+PRC/cqf1
    > =ij61
    > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
    >




  3. Re: Where will our security be in a couple of years? tcpa

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    "trax" wrote in message
    news:aneamvsb58r0u6tmg1vuckr7v7d9ppsiii@4ax.com...
    > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    > Hash: SHA1
    >
    > I have been reading about the next windows operating system and a
    > chip that will be built into the motherboard of future computers that
    > work together to pratically give control of your computer to
    > microsoft, authors of software that you install and possibly the
    > goons. So in case you didn't know one possible future, you might
    > want to be ready.
    >
    >
    > One link I found pretty informative is:
    > http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14/tcpa-faq.html
    >
    > The specs on the "fritz" chip that the trusted computing platform
    > alliance wants to put in all computers:
    > http://www.atmel.com/atmel/acrobat/2015s.pdf
    >
    > If you just want to find your own links on this subject just use a
    > search engine with the words 'tcpa' and 'palladium' included.
    >
    > How secure will PGP be if we had TC computers? I think George Orwell
    > may be been only 20 yrs off on the time setting of his book when I
    > read about this step towards that kind of situation.
    >

    No way I would ever allow that on my pc. The bad stuff only happens if
    everyone adopts it, and I don't think they will. There will always be
    companies selling plain processors, and I'm happy to rely on fsf for all my
    software if it gets that bad. And I think they underestimate the reverse
    engineer. Within hours someone will have figured out how to get Openoffice
    to open a TC msword doc, perfectly legally.

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: 6.5.8ckt http://www.hn.org/drno/pgp.shtml

    iQA/AwUBP2tbPbHlcSptAz1hEQJNGACfYAaqQRgNuXJDZC6zzhsO9S 7SCJEAoM7Z
    Gas8Bm1GvSnjiXZNKM1P1MGu
    =NzE2
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----




  4. Re: Where will our security be in a couple of years? tcpa

    On Friday 19 September 2003 20:38, MikeyD wrote:


    >> How secure will PGP be if we had TC computers? I think George Orwell
    >> may be been only 20 yrs off on the time setting of his book when I
    >> read about this step towards that kind of situation.
    >>

    > No way I would ever allow that on my pc. The bad stuff only happens if
    > everyone adopts it, and I don't think they will. There will always be
    > companies selling plain processors, and I'm happy to rely on fsf for all
    > my software if it gets that bad.


    I agree. The important thing is ensuring that the ``general public'' are
    well-informed about the dangers of TC.

    > And I think they underestimate the
    > reverse engineer. Within hours someone will have figured out how to get
    > Openoffice to open a TC msword doc, perfectly legally.


    Probably not legally, given governments' tendencies to make laws (e.g. the
    DMCA) to suit the needs of big business.


  5. Re: Where will our security be in a couple of years? tcpa

    Adam writes:

    > I agree. The important thing is ensuring that the ``general public'' are
    > well-informed about the dangers of TC.


    I looked at the referenced page and couldn't see any dangers. What are
    they?

    --
    Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.

  6. Re: Where will our security be in a couple of years? tcpa

    On Saturday 20 September 2003 12:12, Mxsmanic wrote:

    > Adam writes:
    >
    >> I agree. The important thing is ensuring that the ``general public'' are
    >> well-informed about the dangers of TC.

    >
    > I looked at the referenced page and couldn't see any dangers. What are
    > they?
    >


    http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/can-you-trust.html



  7. Re: Where will our security be in a couple of years? tcpa

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    > Adam writes:
    >
    > > I agree. The important thing is ensuring that the ``general public''
    > > are well-informed about the dangers of TC.

    >
    > I looked at the referenced page and couldn't see any dangers. What are
    > they?
    >

    The first link was full of them,
    http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14/tcpa-faq.html.

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: 6.5.8ckt http://www.hn.org/drno/pgp.shtml

    iQA/AwUBP2yKkrHlcSptAz1hEQJXIwCfcSXOSkase5jV50c+D9QqT6 fFzzAAoOG1
    H75yfh4mxhXBpkJHFpwNIxWH
    =ANx+
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----




  8. Re: Where will our security be in a couple of years? tcpa

    Adam writes:

    > http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/can-you-trust.html


    That page talks about software, not hardware. The first page described
    hardware. I don't see the risk in the hardware functions provided by
    the described device. What are they?

    --
    Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.

  9. Re: Where will our security be in a couple of years? tcpa

    MikeyD writes:

    > The first link was full of them,
    > http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14/tcpa-faq.html.


    The first link describes a combination of hardware and software, not
    hardware alone.

    For what it's worth, just about every computer in the world already has
    a unique identifier, on its Ethernet card. Despite this, the predicted
    horrors have not come to pass.

    --
    Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.

  10. Re: Where will our security be in a couple of years? tcpa

    True, however the MAC address imbedded in ethernet cards does not provide
    cryptographic keys to decrypt programs. Although a program today could get
    the MAC address to verify its serial number fits the computer, it is
    incapible of causing the trouble described there. They are fundamentally
    different. If as I suspect you will, you make the argument that this is the
    only function of that chip then I believe you should read the entire
    article.

    "Mxsmanic" wrote in message
    news:i2bpmv04lne57rq5b4ie46k7g702eb48or@4ax.com...
    > MikeyD writes:
    >
    > > The first link was full of them,
    > > http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14/tcpa-faq.html.

    >
    > The first link describes a combination of hardware and software, not
    > hardware alone.
    >
    > For what it's worth, just about every computer in the world already has
    > a unique identifier, on its Ethernet card. Despite this, the predicted
    > horrors have not come to pass.
    >
    > --
    > Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.




  11. Re: Where will our security be in a couple of years? tcpa

    On Saturday 20 September 2003 20:36, Mxsmanic wrote:

    > Adam writes:
    >
    >> http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/can-you-trust.html

    >
    > That page talks about software, not hardware. The first page described
    > hardware. I don't see the risk in the hardware functions provided by
    > the described device. What are they?


    The problem is that TC hardware will run only "approved" OSs, which will
    run only approved software with approved modifications. You would not be
    able to decide what your computer could and could not do -- Microsoft and
    other interested parties would make those decisions.


  12. Re: Where will our security be in a couple of years? tcpa

    Adam writes:

    > The problem is that TC hardware will run only "approved"
    > OSs, which will run only approved software with approved
    > modifications.


    I don't see anything in the hardware description that restricts the
    software running on it. Indeed, mere motherboard hardware has no way of
    knowing what the software it is executing may be doing, anyway.

    > You would not be able to decide what your computer could
    > and could not do -- Microsoft and other interested parties
    > would make those decisions.


    What gives you this impression?

    --
    Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.

  13. Re: Where will our security be in a couple of years? tcpa



    trax wrote:

    > I have been reading about the next windows operating system and a
    > chip that will be built into the motherboard of future computers that
    > work together to pratically give control of your computer to
    > microsoft, authors of software that you install and possibly the
    > goons. So in case you didn't know one possible future, you might
    > want to be ready.
    >
    >
    > One link I found pretty informative is:
    > http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14/tcpa-faq.html
    >
    > The specs on the "fritz" chip that the trusted computing platform
    > alliance wants to put in all computers:
    > http://www.atmel.com/atmel/acrobat/2015s.pdf



    "TC", I've known about it for awhile now, makes ya sick, huh? Well, let
    Mr. Bill Gates know we aren't gonna buy that crap! Time to install Linux
    now:
    http://www.slackware.com
    http://www.linux.org



    --
    --------------nonoffensive sig.v1.2RC1------------------------
    - jayjwa 4 Spammers: mailto: listme@listme.dsbl.org
    The New Atr2. PGP/GPG Keys onsite

    ==Atr2.Ath.Cx: Linux Tough, Powered by Slackware.=============




  14. Re: Where will our security be in a couple of years? tcpa

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    > "TC", I've known about it for awhile now, makes ya sick, huh? Well, let
    > Mr. Bill Gates know we aren't gonna buy that crap! Time to install Linux
    > now:
    > http://www.slackware.com
    > http://www.linux.org
    >

    Already started. Will call you after I've finished downloading it. Don't
    hold your breath though, I figure that'll be sometime in December.
    (56K dialup, ISP only allows 4hrs/day)

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: 6.5.8ckt http://www.hn.org/drno/pgp.shtml

    iQA/AwUBP3cibLHlcSptAz1hEQJP6ACgoPaMuGxkyFpmiTM0e5eeRF LoYXEAnisH
    oVPZHRUtKodVSnGCr2jhMYx7
    =b1tR
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----




+ Reply to Thread