![Security Security](http://a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/security_64.png)
![IT IT](http://a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/it_64.png)
Major PC Makers Adopt Trusted Computing Schema 418
An anonymous reader wrote to let us known about a News.com story regarding so-called trusted computing, and its adoption by the major PC manufacturers. From the article: "The three largest computer makers--Dell, Hewlett-Packard and IBM--have started selling desktops and notebooks with so-called trusted computing hardware, which allows security-sensitive applications to lock down data to a specific PC." Interestingly, while Microsoft is said to be behind the idea support won't be forthcoming for trusted computing until they release Longhorn next year, making this a hardware-vendor lead initiative.
The end is coming and people want it!?!? (Score:4, Insightful)
And yes, we all know that now that the name of their security technology is different Microsoft can't "team up" with the hardware makers to lock down PCs to a single OS. It wouldn't be in the best interests of either side to do that right? Oh wait, MSFT already has contractual agreements that basically force this to happen why not take it a step further and make people not only pay extra for the OS pre-installed/distributed w/the PC but also make them have no choice but to run it once they get it.
I love the wording in the article... Oooh it's the hardware vendors taking the initiative and not Microsoft (like Microsoft is always at the forefront of technology or something). Is that supposed to make me feel better that the entire computing platform will be locked down leading to the end of free distribution of anything, the Internet as we know it, etc?
Didn't Ben Franklin say something about this? Yeah.
Re:The end is coming and people want it!?!? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:The end is coming and people want it!?!? (Score:2, Insightful)
Don't want to interoperate with the rest of the secure users out there? Don't use hardware that is tied to THE secure OS.
See, DRM won't work otherwise.
Re:The end is coming and people want it!?!? (Score:5, Interesting)
If trusted computing reaches the point you can't get on the Internet unless you are running it, and at that point trusted computing means your completely relinquish control of your computer and your privacy, then maybe geeks should take this opportunity to start a network of their own free of corprate and government control. Think Pirate Radio except for the internet, the Pirate's Web, or Alternet.
At least at a local level you should be able to create a wirless mesh network free of the shackles the government and corporations are inevitably going to try to put on the Internet in the name of "security", "safety" and to protect their monopolies on music and films.
Its going to be a little harder to do the long haul part of the network, since you are going to have to do a lot of hops and latency will be terrible. Thankfully as disk drives and hardware get cheaper people can make liberal use of mirrors to that there are local copies of valuable stuff like Wikipedia and open source archives.
You will also probably be confined to latency sensitive online games only in your local community.
All in all I'm not sure it would be such a bad thing because:
- It would foster a greater sense of local community involvement, which is sorely lacking on the Internet.
- It would compel geeks to be resourceful and roll up their sleeves instead of just open up their wallet and dole out cash to the giant, abusive telecommunications giant every month.
- I wager the Internet is going to be in a pretty steady decline in usefulness as governments and corporations seek to exert ever more control over it and try to extract subscriptions and fees for anything interesting, or saturate you with advertising. Its also a near inevitability that they will seek to wipe out bit torrent, all p2p or anything that is used by pirates, even when they also have legitimate uses.
- People might start appreciating the value of the freedom things like open source give you once corporation controlled governments start taking them away. You usually don't value something until you lose it. Maybe it will be just the thing to ignite a sustainable and powerful political movement to regain control of our governments. As it is everyone is to fat, dumb and happy to do anything about it so corporation controlled governments are eviscerating out civil rights and no one give a damn as long as they have their porn, video games and reality TV.
All in all I favor college radio, which is the closes thing to pirate radio you can usually find. They play interesting, eclectic mixes of often good music because they are putting out content they like, not content that ClearChannel and the RIAA want to shove down peoples throats and make them like simply by depriving them of anything better.
Not sure that the Internet might not be rejuvenated if it goes back to its BBS, Modem roots. I wonder if spam, spyware, script kiddies and the like will be lesser or greater on the Pirate's net versus the "trusted" computing Internet. I wager the free lancers would be worse on the Pirate's net but the corporate controlled spam, spying, privacy invasion and intrusion will be worse on the "trusted" internet.
I wager we can pull off an Alternet as long as unregulated wireless is tolerated by the government and continues to improve. If once the Alternet starts rolling and the government, corporations seek to outlaw unregulated wireless and wipe it out, then it gets to be more interested. Could we run a usable and interesting mesh network in the face of a hostile, corporate controlled police state trying to wipe it out.
Re:The end is coming and people want it!?!? (Score:3)
-Jesse
Re:The end is coming and people want it!?!? (Score:3, Interesting)
I imagine once you started using dark fiber on any scale eventually the owner would notice. Alternately I'm wondering if you can tap fiber cables and run a rogue signal on it without the owner noticing it.
I wonder if ISP's working un
Not gonna happen, (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:The end is coming and people want it!?!? (Score:3, Insightful)
It's currently legal if you keep your broadcast power level low enough (5 watts?). This means that your mesh will be quite local, but the software you need has already been developed, and the hardware is essentially there. (WiFi local nets running TCP/IP with local name servers, authentication, etc...essentially a mini-internet.)
But do note all the pieces that you need to have in place, especially the hardware. Now figure out what your points of vulnerability
Re:The end is coming and people want it!?!? (Score:3, Interesting)
The Trusted Computing Group has in fact stated that they are creating a system that would deny you an internet connection unless you are running a Trusted Computer. The US presiden'ts Cyber Security advisor did in fact g
Re:The end is coming and people want it!?!? (Score:4, Insightful)
South Park shreds everyone equally, its only fair they give liberal college grads and hippies equal time. Its comedy, satire, parody....laugh.
Not sure I said they are out to "get us". The corporate part of the combine are out to milk us for all the profit they can squeeze out of us. The government part is out to exert the maximum control over us that they can get away with(i.e. as much as we let them), and most of them are out to steer pork to their rich friends and corporate benefactors. When they retire from politics most of them rake in fat paybacks from the companies and people they bestowed the pork upon.
Just go back and read the history of the Medicare "reform" bill, the one with the supposed drug benefit for seniors. It was written by drug, healthcare, and insurance companies for their benefit, not for the benefit of seniors or tax payers. They basically bought the Medicare adminstrator, he was job shopping with these very companies while the bill was being negotiated, with White House permission though it was a blatant conflict of interest. He intentionally concealed the cost of the bill, threatened his subordinates who wanted to give the real number to Congress, and outright lied when he told everyone it would be $400 million which was exactly the highest figure that would pass Congress. As soon as it passed the Bush adminsitration admitted it would really be at least $500 billion. A month or two ago it was jacked up to $720 billion [orb6.com]. There is in fact no limit on how much it will cost because the drug companies told Congress to add a clause forbidding Medicare from negotiating fair prices for the drugs it buys as part of the drug benefit. The drug companies can charge as much as they feel like and will. Don't be surprised when it really kicks in the Republican's will declare Medicare in a fiscal crisis and either jack up our payroll taxes or cut benefits.
If you think corporations don't control the American government at this point you are either naive, clueless or not paying attention.
I doubt the corprate/government combine is going to take the net to trusted computing suddenly, it will probably happen slowly and gradually so no one freaks. But you just have to look at Slashdot to see that governments/corporations are in full scale war against bittorrent and p2p, the NSA is getting geered up to spy on everyone, not just those outside America.
Seems to me its a good idea to take advantage of all the goodness that is wireless and mesh and at least start building community networks that retain some freedom. Fact is the Internet and your beloved giant telecom company ISP's and government are going to do no nothing but charge more, outlaw more and allow less and less as time goes by.
Re:The end is coming and people want it!?!? (Score:5, Insightful)
Linux will fall into worthless obscurity because it will run on one of the various unsecure networks that the majority of computer users will never "want" to see. After all the only people that use unsecure computing are terrorists and those that are against the RIAA/MPAA/MSFT/GOV metroplex.
Re:The end is coming and people want it!?!? (Score:2)
To be fair, I know very few computer users who are for the RIAA/MPAA/MSFT/GOV metroplex.
Re:The end is coming and people want it!?!? (Score:3, Informative)
I know very few computer users who are for the RIAA/MPAA/MSFT/GOV metroplex.
I know a lot more computer users who don't know jack, but do want to see that video of Michael Jackson, Brittney, etc. and will follow the helpful wizard into the path of *AA compliance for their "computer".
Re:The end is coming and people want it!?!? (Score:2)
Re:The end is coming and people want it!?!? (Score:5, Funny)
American Innovation? Like The Lion King 2 1/2? (Score:2, Funny)
Re:The end is coming and people want it!?!? (Score:2)
Who will sell what? Are we going to have to bitch at motherboard makers, chipset makers, and/or OEMs to provide versions of both? And how easy will TCPA be to work with? I better damn well not be forced to phone home to anybody to make my damn hardware work.
Re:The end is coming and people want it!?!? (Score:5, Funny)
You can choose from Windows 95, Windows 98, Windows ME, Windows NT, Windows 2000, AND Windows XP.
Heck we've even got some old Windows 3.1 disks here if you want 'em. How's that for choice?!
Re:The end is coming and people want it!?!? (Score:4, Interesting)
See the Trusted Computing FAQ [cam.ac.uk] for the many reasons why this is a bad idea and why lock-in will in fact be a result, despite IBM's claims to the contrary. Written by Ross Anderson, Professor of Security Engineering at the UK's leading univeristy, this article is an excellent primer.
Re:The end is coming and people want it!?!? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:The end is coming and people want it!?!? (Score:3, Interesting)
The IBM paper was mostly factually accurate, entirely deceptive, and contained at least one flat out lie. The one flat out lie is "they even say that the scheme is poorly executed for use as a DRM". The only way that is not a lie is if IBM has a very peculiar definition of "poorly". While everyone involved in Trusted computing is constantly chanting that it was not designed for DRM, each and every one of them has at one time or another directly admited that it is in
Re:The end is coming and people want it!?!? (Score:3, Interesting)
http://www.gripe2ed.com/scoop/story/2005/3/14/235 [gripe2ed.com]4 40/804
Now, what if this were the case for EVERY computer... I foresee a thriving and extremely lucrative business in TC data recovery, where rather than merely sending Ontrack or whomever your wonked HD, you have to $$$$end them the entire computer (um... can TC include the monitor??)
Re:The end is coming and people want it!?!? (Score:2, Insightful)
It doesn't make sense for MS to force people to use Windows. Then they have to provide support for those people. It would also lead to a lot of disgruntled users. It also wouldn't be to the advantage of the hardware makers because they would lose customers not interested in Windows to smaller vendors.
It seems like the ideal syst
Re:The end is coming and people want it!?!? (Score:2)
The false opposition and noise raised on these two aspects serve to distract from the real problem, which is that governments need this "feature" to help them track all your internet activity and ID any documents and programs created or passing through your machine. Combined with computer sales slips and credit
How about... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:How about... (Score:2)
Can you trust your computer? [gnu.org]
Preying on fear (Score:3, Interesting)
Th vendors are just preying on fear.
Backups? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Backups? (Score:2)
This would completely dodge the issue. If there is a HW key though and all your data is on the Hard drive and Windows crashes (suprise!). Assuming, that trusted computing stuff is turned on (wether willingly or not) will the data on the HDD be locked to the computer? It sounds all fine and great for large computer installtions w/ tape backup and such but for home computer users, many will probably lose data.
Re:Backups? (Score:2, Insightful)
i have no doubt that this so-called 'trusted computing' will be compromised by hackers at some point....
what bothers me is:
software and hardware vendors will CONTROL the computer, not the owner (well, they will control the owner and his use of the computer. the owner will have no control). billy boy will control whether or not your microsoft word will function (even if you've paid for it).
new software "activation" (which is complete bs to begin with) will soo
You are screwed (Score:2)
Sure might be a way around it, somehow.. but you think 'joe user' will know what to do?
Re:Backups? (Score:3, Informative)
I read the hardware technical specification. The rules are quite explicit:
If your chip dies, your data must be irretrievable. Period.
If your computer has *not yet died* and you wish to upgrade to a new computer, you may only do so to a computer using the exact same model chip from the exact same manufacturer, and only with the assistance of that manufacturer, and only after destroying the data on the original machine. Under those conditions and only those conditions may y
Note to self: (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Note to self: (Score:2)
But even if doesn't join, Macs already have most of the bad features of TC like vendor lock-in etc,.
**Ker-PLONK** (Score:5, Funny)
...that was the sound of me moving from x86 to PPC.
(As long as debian keeps up support.)
Re:**Ker-PLONK** (Score:2)
Re:**Ker-PLONK** (Score:2)
how sure are you? (Score:2)
NORTH AMERICA, which includes our friendly canucks, have 26.7% of the worlds internet users
this is the best stat I could find on the topic,
but do you really think that 73.3 % (+ canada) of the world uses less than half of the equipment online?
Re:**Ker-PLONK** (Score:2)
Re:**Ker-PLONK** (Score:5, Funny)
Your computer won't trust you (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Your computer won't trust you (Score:4, Insightful)
I care about a future where I am still able to download, modify and share OSS software.
If executables have to be validated and signed for trustworthyness, then everyone will need to compile their own.
The "legit" version of firefox may work, but modify the source and compile your own, and it won't play in your windows system. Don't even think of taking it to your friends' house.
(somebody please tell me I am wrong about this)
Re:Your computer won't trust you (Score:3, Informative)
"Treacherous computing puts the existence of free operating systems and free applications at risk, because you may not be able to run them at all. Some versions of treacherous computing would require the operating system to be specifically authorized by a particular company. Free operating systems could not be installed. Some versions of treacherous computing would require every program to be specifically authorized by the operating system deve
Re:Your computer won't trust you (Score:2)
Re:Your computer won't trust you (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Your computer won't trust you (Score:5, Funny)
Well, I'll buy it only if it says those things in that cool HAL 9000 voice...
Re:Your computer won't trust you (Score:4, Funny)
<voice type=5-yr-old-girl pitch=High> Sorry, HAL 9000 voice files are not authorized for this PC </voice>
Re:Your computer won't trust you (Score:3, Interesting)
Before posting any comments... (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14/tcpa-faq.html [cam.ac.uk]
this: http://www.gentoo.org/news/20050202-trustedgentoo [gentoo.org]. xml and, linked from there, this:
http://www.research.ibm.com/gsal/tcpa/tcpa_rebutt [ibm.com]a l.pdf
CORRECT LINK (Score:2)
correct link is this [ibm.com]
Re:Before posting any comments... (Score:2)
trustedgentoo.xml [gentoo.org]
tcpa_rebuttal.pdf [ibm.com]
Hmm... there appears to be in a bug in slash. The first time I tried to post those links the same thing happened that happened to the OP. Thankfully I previewed.
Re:Before posting any comments... (Score:3, Interesting)
Vendor specific? (Score:2)
Why does this have to be vendor specific? Will it have support for *nx, *BSD, Solaris, etc?
Or this a contract with Microsoft?
Is the specs to this opened or closed?
Anyone have a link with more info?
This doesn't have to be controlled by Microsoft (Score:5, Interesting)
See the Trusted Gentoo [gentoo.org] project for example.
Until we see locked down BIOSes then this is hardly a threat to Linux if it responds quickly.
Linux is irrelevant, err, untrusted. (Score:3, Funny)
What'cha gonna do?
What'cha gonna do when your new hardware won't boot Linux for you?
Re:This doesn't have to be controlled by Microsoft (Score:5, Insightful)
When the trusted computing chip was needed to run Windows, I did nothing, I did not run windows.
When the trusted computing chip checksummed the bios, I did nothing, I could still boot linux.
When the trusted computing chip could lock out the bios or any OS not signed I did nothing...
my computer no longer worked.
Catchy slogan (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Catchy slogan (Score:2)
rms' writing about trusted computing (Score:5, Informative)
free bios + the right to read (Score:3, Interesting)
can figure out how to install a new bios on a computer, especially a
laptop. I don't know why we can put linux on an xbox but nobody can
get a free bios on a laptop.
Stick to AMD machines, avoid Intel and IBM. Heh, IBM. We talk like
they're our allies but they're pushing patents and treacherous
computing. They're a _much_ bigger threat than SCO ever was.
If you haven't yet read stallman's dystopian short story The Right To Read [gnu.org],
this might be
Nothing new (Score:5, Interesting)
Problem for Apple (Score:5, Interesting)
what does this really mean? (Score:3, Interesting)
I've read the article, and many related articles, but it is still not clear to me what this technology really means...
I am pretty sure there are answers to this technology, but I haven't found a clear concise source to make me feel any better about what this technology may bring upon OSS. I'm afraid it might be bad. Someone reassure me.
As an aside, is this really a direction technology needed to take? Is there really that much of a need for "trusted" computing? Sheeesh, I've not found this to be a huge issue, and I hope this technology incurs huge backlash when its inconvenience far exceeds its benefits.... (especially since the type of intrusion and hacking I've ever seen has little to do with protecting data and much more to do with social engineering).
Re:what does this really mean? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:what does this really mean? (Score:3, Informative)
The current implementation is optional, and you don't have to even enable the security crap. I know I have my IBM Thinkpad with one of these chips in it, and I just flicked it off in the BIOS when I found out. The keys are user-controlled, as I recall, not manufacturer-distributed.
The fear is that either some big company M****s*ft will make software which won't run if you don't have trusted computer installed, and/or that Microsoft's implementation [Palladium, or whatever they're calling
Re:what does this really mean? (Score:2)
Trusted Computing huh? (Score:2)
Microsoft's Version Here (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Microsoft's Version Here (Score:2)
Re:Microsoft's Version Here (Score:2)
will it work? (Score:3, Interesting)
I believe instead these systems work by only giving access to certain content areas if the booting software has the right key or matches the right checksum. However, once that access has been granted the software is in control and a software flaw in the software could allow for copying.
How long do you think it will be till they find a bug in longhorn?
Locking data to a PC... (Score:3, Insightful)
I suspect that the idea is that you'd use hardware-based encryption (which must be optional, otherwise general removable media would be worthless) and the OS would be expected to support it through some service layer. But anything it does in hardware should be emulatable in software. So, the solution is only truly useful if all parties agree to play nice. That seems to be a ludicrous expectation.
It seems to me that the strategy is wrong. There's no mechanism that isn't ultimately circumventable, so simply eliminate the complex hurdles and work such that there's nothing to circumvent and no reason to do so (change the model of how you operate).
IBM (Score:3, Interesting)
Another reason I'm glad I use Macs, really. Let's hope Linus's PowerMac really does drive Linux on PPC as much as we all hope it will. Then, let's hope IBM starts pushing PPC based systems more than the Xeon powered servers I always see advertised.
This is good for Linux. (Score:2)
Because more people will have to pay for Windows, which costs too much, and therefore the poor and those not inclined to part with $100 for the stripped-down version of Windows will look for another way to get a free operating system -- legally, this time. It's well-known that most Linux distributions are available at no cost to the user except production of CDs or a DVD.
And that's the best thing I can say about Palladium -- the issues others have raised about backups et cetera s
Re:This is good for Linux. (Score:2, Insightful)
How do you explain to your relatives that internet access is blocked because the ISP cannot confirm your trusted status?
At first glance, putting your head in the sand and running away from the problem is feasible, but if this plays out as far as people expect, then your machine is not your own, and the only way round it is total compliance.
Think of an x-box as 1st generation.
Without some VERY clever trickery, you
not a big deal really... (Score:5, Insightful)
I would also say that there will always be a market for open computers. The market always has ways around this.
Re:not a big deal really... (Score:2, Insightful)
Absolutely. Just bear in mind that the people with the badges and guns often call that way "crime."
KFG
This has nothing to do with protecting users! (Score:3, Insightful)
Balkanization (Score:5, Insightful)
On the one hand I like Microsoft buying into the wild-eyed "Alamo" mentality of the content trust, trying to arm wrestle every customer for control, because the more aggressive they get with Digital Restrictions Management, the more it will drive everyone into the arms of competitors, including open and free software.
I wish I could say I thought trusted computing was doomed to fail, but frankly I think it can be considerably successful. If the end result is that your computer is not managed by you, and 3rd parties like Microsoft can take the XBox busines model (and probably, simplicity of interface) deeper into PC territory, this is probably a relief for a variety of consumers beleaguered with "general purpose" computing and all that it entails, viruses, spyware, etc. Better software architecture could solve their problems, but outside control can solve it almost as well.
I guess what will ultimately happen is balkanization, as more aggressive attempts at controlling the platform will split consumers into low and high ends. At the low end, the "game console" converges into a media system and a simple home computer, where every application is trusted and the vendor is the gatekeeper. They'll be happier because, like video consoles today, the hardware is cheap and the costs are deferred into the software and services. At the high end, the general purpose PC that is currently a staple in the home will fade into niche status - a tool for hobbyists and professionals. What fills the void in between, in the end, is hopefully a free-software-based system that is simple enough for all consumers to use, that provides them with an alternative to commercial products, perhaps marketed by a white knight corporation much as IBM has taken free software to the server world.
Yeah, Right (Score:3, Insightful)
Can't say I'm surprised. We knew this was coming several years ago. I bought a new keyboard last week and was shocked at the number of MS keyboards on display featuring the little fingerprint reader built right in. Within a few years we'll probably have the gubmint mandating all new PCs be equipped with TC elements. To keep us safe from terrorists no doubt.
On the bright side this will be hacked from here to kingdom come. In that sense it's good they're showing their hand now so intrepid BIOS hackers and EEs can start peeling away the mystery. What's that? The latest software won't work without TC? TC-compliant apps will work better together? Yeah. Right.
Oh boy... a secure PC, at last! (Score:5, Funny)
It's going to be so nice, knowing that my data in my PC can't be taken away, erased, trashed, or otherwise caused to be lost. This will keep my stuff secure, for me.
Finally, I'll be able to trust my computer.
The Right To Read (Score:3, Informative)
The Right To Read [gnu.org] by RMS.
Securing data offline? (Score:2)
I thought one of the best ways to keep data secure is not to have the PC on the network...
TC (Score:3, Informative)
Re:TC (Score:3, Interesting)
No it's a bug in slashcode (I think) look at my other post [slashdot.org].Now..
The IBM rebuttal first twists the words of the authors and takes it completely out of context, the authors were trying to tell things in layman's terms and everyone can see that. Then, in the security argument, it seems to ignore the fact that most security breaches occur due to software errors and the fact that once the "trusted" software itself is compromised, there's not much TC can
The computer is your friend... (Score:3, Funny)
Just what I needed (Score:2)
This won't work... (Score:4, Insightful)
I think MS and Intel have underestimated people's determination not to be shafted by The Man.
This won't make me popular around here... (Score:5, Interesting)
Of course, such a system would have undesirable uses as well, DRM and the like...
Dear Dell, Hewlett-Packard and IBM (Score:2)
In my security policy, running MS software is an unacceptable risk. Could you make me a PC that will not run any MS software at all? Oh yes, I assume I will not need to pay MS tax for a system that is disabled to run MS software.
Yours faithfully,
Spagh
The end is at hand.. (Score:2)
Unless someone like IBM ponies up to pay the fees to get things authenticated to be on the 'trusted list', nothing we have will run in 5 years.
Sure, you say 'but it can be turned off', and that is true, today.. In time that wont be an option and it will be mandatory at some point in the near future for most people. Sure some will find ways around it, bu
Don't do it, it's a trick...... (Score:2, Funny)
This is a trusted computer....
Comment removed (Score:3, Informative)
This couldmake me switch (Score:2)
I'm still ticked about compaq putting my XP install on a hard drive partition instead of giving me the disk.
How Does This Work? (Score:2)
In general, security is about holding secrets in the right places. Putting se
No one is noticing this part.... (Score:2, Interesting)
Its a trust thing... (Score:2, Interesting)
This prevents casual logic analyzers and other hardware hacktools from reverse engineering the component level interoperability. While its not a garuntee of securing the design, it sure elevates the level of effort required to manufacture alternative hardware components.
Sound fam
Whats the difference between this and (Score:4, Insightful)
You might say "but but but but but but" this is going to be different, more secure, stronger.
Or something. But you're still going to be selling the public hardware, that they control. Hell, some of these computers will never be accessing the internet or any network at all. How will you control what they do after you turn them into the hands of the customer?
You made hardware dongles for expensive programs, they were broken. You made hardware copy protection for console game platforms, it was broken (even when games were shipped as a cartridge, eventually people made cloners)
You've made DVD players you thought were unbreakable, unleashed them on the masses, then they were broken, so to spite everyone you created new laws to try to stop people from doing it (DMCA)
You created directTV and dish network. They're hacked. And before that? Satallite TV was scrambled, but there were descramblers.
ANY hardware based "encryption" or "dongle" or "trusted computing initiative" is security through obscurity. Do you think every person who ever worked for all these conglomerate companies will be able to keep a secret?
The first person who finds out you use pins 1 and 6 on the chip to pass keying information will end up leaking it to the public. Said public will start watching those pins and find out what needs to be sent to "ok" a program running.
So you tell me your "dongle" is smack dab in the middle of the CPU, no sniffing possible?
Someone will just realease the keys then. It's only a matter of time. In the meantime, you're just blowing smoke up the asses of all the customers you have who want this product, and pissing off all the customers who don't want this product.
Give it a rest. PC's were pretty cool until you started breaking them. If you make them too hard to use, the world as a whole will find something new to play with.
HP is already on the fritz because they've merged too many times and found out they can't be the next IBM. Imagine if everyone stops buying from you and starts buying from a toaster company?
my paper on the subject (Score:3, Interesting)
http://actusre.us/cjam/woodford.pdf [actusre.us]
Re:This will die a quick death. (Score:2)
I checked Device Manager and they were not installed. I'm NOT talking about one machine, I'm talking about 7 machines. It appears that HP didn't install the USB drivers on the entire model line!
I installed the drivers on the one I used and ports worked. I just don't get it!