Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Newsweek: New Microsoft Program 'Palladium' Next Step in Computer Security
PRnewswire ^ | 6/24/02

Posted on 06/23/2002 8:03:20 AM PDT by Brian Mosely

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-51 next last
To: Brian Mosely
The plan will also limit what arrives (and runs on) your computer according to where it comes from and who creates it.

Translation: non-Microsoft software will encounter "problems"

21 posted on 06/23/2002 10:16:28 AM PDT by SauronOfMordor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

"One hurdle in establishing this trust technology is getting people to trust Microsoft."

But, I'm sure, they've really really changed this time.

22 posted on 06/23/2002 10:32:09 AM PDT by D-fendr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: D-fendr
Yeah, just like Socialism is really going to work this time, honest!
23 posted on 06/23/2002 11:08:26 AM PDT by dheretic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Brian Mosely
I'm certain there are some good, sound, innovative ideas to be found in this concept, but what worries me is the gratuitous inclusion of copyright issues when Microsoft still haven't shown any signs that they've begun to take security seriously. Maybe I've missed the signs, if so I'd welcome links to info on actual changes taking place (seriously, I'm interested. No flames, please).

I suspect that the real motivation behind this development is the inclusion of the firmware that would just happen to give Hollywood, Tokyo and Madison Avenue absolute control over the data users decide to store on their systems.

24 posted on 06/23/2002 11:16:47 AM PDT by dwollmann
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: eno_
Hey Dominic, I bet we can agree on this:

I'm surprised, but yes we can agree on that.

From MS's past history I think it likely that they will go there. They have quite a pattern of such attempts at control. It appears to in fact be the next logical step in their business plan.

25 posted on 06/23/2002 11:21:46 AM PDT by Dominic Harr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: eno_
If Microsoft implements DRM throughout the system, even hardcore MS fans like me will be installing and running Linux...

Better hang on to your old hardware... If MS rams this hardware change through, nothing but signed MS software will run.

26 posted on 06/23/2002 1:32:01 PM PDT by TechJunkYard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: TechJunkYard
LinuxPPC works quite well on Macs. My PowerBook runs YellowDog 2.2 very nicely. If OS X isn't to your liking (I just can't run it fast enough for my tastes) then LinuxPPC distributions are ready to meet your needs.
27 posted on 06/23/2002 3:09:59 PM PDT by dheretic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: dheretic
Good point; There's a HW platform that MS can't own.
28 posted on 06/23/2002 3:36:49 PM PDT by TechJunkYard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Glenn
The business community would never allow the adoption of a chip like you describe. And the business community is one hell of a user base of what you call "personal" computers.

The business community can be lulled into accepting this by splashy pieces in Newsweek Magazine with phrases like "the system is designed to dramatically improve our ability to control and protect personal and corporate information" and other associated doublespeak. Businesses lose a lot of money due to IP breakouts and virus breakins... if MS offered them a way to "stop" that, they'd love it.

But go take a look at the MSNBC article and the patent documents and you'll see that DRM enforcement is precisely what this is all about.

And what a beautiful way for Microsoft to maintain its PC OS monopoly! Embed a public key in a chip, make sure that only Windows has the private key, and make it illegal to even try to crack the scheme.

29 posted on 06/23/2002 4:14:41 PM PDT by TechJunkYard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: TechJunkYard
The business community can be lulled into accepting this by splashy pieces in Newsweek Magazine with phrases like "the system is designed to dramatically improve our ability to control and protect personal and corporate information" and other associated doublespeak. Businesses lose a lot of money due to IP breakouts and virus breakins... if MS offered them a way to "stop" that, they'd love it.

Why not? The idiots at Slashdot have been lulled into the NSA's version of Linux ...
30 posted on 06/23/2002 10:59:08 PM PDT by Bush2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Bush2000
idiots at Slashdot

Isn't slashdot owned by a corporation now.... ?

Maybe microsoft is putting a little pressure on them!

31 posted on 06/23/2002 11:11:13 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Bush2000
Oho, a /.-basher, eh?
I'd say there are far more idiots reading Newsweak than Slashdot.
32 posted on 06/24/2002 3:48:18 AM PDT by TechJunkYard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: TechJunkYard
If MS rams this hardware change through, nothing but signed MS software will run.
That would be difficult to accomplish. Linux runs on a wide variety of CPUs. So while it is true that x86 CPUs from Intel and AMD are the most cost-effective, especially when you figure in the economy of scale in motherboards, etc., it certainly isn't the case that MS could shut Linux out of usable high-performance CPUs. And if Intel thought to come out with a "trusted Linux" distro, it be a giant flop. I also hear a distinct silence on this from Apple.
33 posted on 06/24/2002 6:51:37 AM PDT by eno_
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: eno_
That would be difficult to accomplish. Linux runs on a wide variety of CPUs. So while it is true that x86 CPUs from Intel and AMD are the most cost-effective, especially when you figure in the economy of scale in motherboards, etc., it certainly isn't the case that MS could shut Linux out of usable high-performance CPUs.

Hobbyists aren't going to want to go out and buy high-end hardware, except possibly for the gamers, they want to run their stuff on cheap PCs as they do now. Linux developers, especially the Freshmeat crowd, can't afford to totally re-tool to another hardware platform.

What MS proposes would require a re-design of the PC hardware, so everything on the board up to and including the keyboard, screen and speakers is encrypted to evoke "trust" and to control content copying. The article specifically mentions public key cryptography, and if MS controls the keys, they'll control the platform, and what you can do with it.

And if Intel thought to come out with a "trusted Linux" distro, it be a giant flop.

The distro, more than likely, if Microsoft controls the keys.

I also hear a distinct silence on this from Apple.

That's not hard to figure out. Apple doesn't deal with x86 architecture, so if MS screws it up that's potentially more business for Apple.

34 posted on 06/24/2002 8:50:05 AM PDT by TechJunkYard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: eno_
Sound more like an attack on individuals owning the stand alone computer.

In order for them to control your content you must not be able to use your computer without an outside hookup.

35 posted on 06/24/2002 9:20:35 AM PDT by Greeklawyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Brian Mosely
"I'm willing to take a chance that the benefits are more than the potential downside," says Dave Farber, a renowned Internet guru. "But if they screw up, I'll squeal like a bloody pig."


"He's got a real purty mouth, ain't he?"

36 posted on 06/24/2002 9:23:52 AM PDT by Darth Sidious
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Brian Mosely
Here's a beauty:

I've been writing a piece of music and recorded a draft of it about a week ago onto my Win2000 machine with SoundForge.  I then converted it to .mp3 with AudioCatalyst and uploaded it to my website.

Yesterday I downloaded it on my personal laptop at work, so I could hear it through different speakers.  When I opened it with Media Player 7, the digital media security kernel kicked in and brought up a dialog box stating that I was opening a piece of music "recorded from a CD" and asking me if I wanted "migrate my license" and warning me about copyright infringements.

ON MY OWN MUSIC AND ON MY OWN MACHINES.

If such a simple security concept is already that screwed up, how does MS think it's going to credibly expand in that area?  Palladium will just continue to prove that MS has expanded into markets it can't competently code in.

37 posted on 06/26/2002 6:16:20 PM PDT by Psycho_Bunny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TechJunkYard
Bumping

Yessirree, this is scary stuff indeed. Complete control of everything you do on YOUR PC, disguised as a security solution. Here's a good FAQ on Palladium: TCPA / Palladium Frequently Asked Questions

It's well worth the effort to read the whole thing.
38 posted on 06/27/2002 12:34:08 PM PDT by jenny65
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: jenny65
Thanks for the bump; I reviewed that one earlier today. The Slashdot article keeps getting new tidbits added to it, including a surprising (to me, anyway) weigh-in by Bob Cringely:
This is diabolical. If Microsoft is successful, Palladium will give Bill Gates a piece of every transaction of any type while at the same time marginalizing the work of any competitor who doesn't choose to be Palladium-compliant. So much for Linux and Open Source, but it goes even further than that. So much for Apple and the Macintosh. It's a militarized network architecture only Dick Cheney could love.
.....
Under Palladium as I understand it, the Internet goes from being ours to being theirs. The very data on your hard drive ceases to be yours because it could self-destruct at any time. We'll end up paying rent to use our own data!

This move will change personal computing forever.... and NOT in favor of the users. MS will truly take over the Internet if allowed to. It must be fought.

39 posted on 06/27/2002 5:50:11 PM PDT by TechJunkYard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Brian Mosely
To ensure security, the system requires special security chips, which Intel and Advanced Microdevices have agreed to produce.

What crap. A properly designed system (to serve the security interests of the user, not the desire of Billgatus of Borg to control what can run on your computer) should be in software that can be installed or not as one sees fit.

40 posted on 06/28/2002 6:48:57 AM PDT by steve-b
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-51 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson