evolution in action (Re: Napster)

[Ben Laurie]

iriXx wrote:
>>>>>>The same suppression techniques will not work with many of the
>>>>>>replacement technologies.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Isn't this the reason we're going to get/have got TCPA and Palladium?
>>>>
>>>>Not if you believe Microsoft :-)
>>>>
>>>>Anyway, the implications of TCPA/Palladium anywhere other than the 
>>>>server room are so appalling it'll never happen, IMO.
>>>
>>>
>>>... and, not if Lucky Green's patent on linking Palladium to TCPA comes
>>>through ;-)....
>>
>>You mean DRM under Palladium.
> 
> 
> which M$ has explicitly stated is not what Palladium does... ;-)

I already said that ;-)

> actually, from the article i'd read, Lucky's patent covers Palladium on
> TCPA-systems as well... do you have information that is different?...

Hmmm. Well, I was there at the time and I know it was a specific 
response to Microsoft's claim that Palladium doesn't do DRM, so it was 
generally aimed at Palladium rather than TCPA. However, it seems to me 
that the relevant capabilities of both are possibly sufficiently similar 
that it would apply to both.

Note, though, that TCPA doesn't currently include protected I/O space, 
so is trivially vulnerable to hardware based attacks on DRM.

Cheers,

Ben.

-- 
http://www.apache-ssl.org/ben.html       http://www.thebunker.net/

"There is no limit to what a man can do or how far he can go if he
doesn't mind who gets the credit." - Robert Woodruff