Re: <nettime> Intel outside!

[martin pichlmair <pi@attacksyour.net>]

hi andy, jaromil, list,

> Disclaimer: I dont think boycotting the McDonalds of the processor
> industry to be more effective than properly using DRM.  User  
> defined DRM
> is an effective and intelligent use of hardware to prevent  
> unauthorized
> software like trojans and spyware.  And for that matter, no one in the
> Free/Open source communities is really against it either.  I remember
> reading an interview some time ago with Linus Torvalds planning to  
> add DRM
> capabilities to the Linux kernel.

that's slightly exaggerated. torvalds famous words were: "I want to make
it clear that DRM is perfectly ok with Linux!" not that he wants to
include it _into_ the kernel.

his thoughts in detail here:
http://linuxtoday.com/developer/2003042401126OSKNLL


> Now if DRM gives you a hard time with
> software or allow privacy intrusions from companies, dont use the
> software, write your own, or use an alternative.  Theirs plenty of  
> POOP
> out there (Plenty Of Other Programs).  The challenge to alternative
> operating systems is in the Palladium / Trusted Computing initiatives.
> Trusted Computing (in true Orwellian fashion) would completely  
> shutdown
> your ability to use your PC.

it will at least shut down your ability to use your pc the way you were
used to. the more i see typical "office pc" users the more i think that
shutting down no trustworthy content will not work on the long run.
spyware runs on so many win systems because people _love_ to
double-click unknown apps they got by mail. people do not care if their
keystrokes are sent over to company xy. i think drm significantly
conflicts with everyday pc use and even though code is in fact law there
are behaviours you cannot stop with the right code.  people ripping dvds
do not know that they use the DeCSS algorithm.  and they don't care. if
this war cannot be won on the content (protection) side, what will be
gained? i trust the masses and i don't trust code.


> I'm kind of surprised hardware manufacturers
> dont issue an End User License Agreement in similar worded legalese
> like Micrsoft.

they will. but it is inherent to tc and not formulated as legal but as
hard code.

you can find sony (mostly content manufacturer) and most hardware
manufacturers onboard:
https://www.trustedcomputinggroup.org/about/members/

(a good text about tc can be found here, btw:
http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14/tcpa-faq.html )

> But even there the community has FreeBIOS solutions.

only as long as hardware manufacturers open their specs.  theoretically
also the bios would have to have a valid, signed certificate to run.

thinking aloud, please comment:

the key problem to trusted computing is that it is based on the trust
between machines and not users. kevin mitnick emphasises the importance
of social engineering when hacking (The Art of Deception: Controlling
the Human Element of Security, Wiley, 2002). detaching computers from
being socially crackable is the key interest of the tc initiative. and
they do it by denying the characteristics of the computer as a
communication media. i hope that this attempt is as naive as i think.
with all our desktop media production there will have to be easy ways of
getting your own media playing on the computer of your sister.

there is one good example of a working drm system: the itunes music
store. why does it work? maybe because music is a throwaway media
nowadays? maybe because its tiny little pieces of media one buys there?
the scalability of this model has yet to be proven. maybe software drm
would work if the software is done in a far more fragmented way than
windows (contrary to unix) is. that would open up a great number of
possibilities for the open source community.


lg
martin


attacksyour.net/pi



#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net