Intel to include DRM in new Pentium 4 series processors

[Matthew Astley]

On Fri, Sep 13, 2002 at 08:06:13PM +0100, Peter Fairbrother wrote:
> Brian Gladman wrote:

> > Some are [ethical companies], some are not. Personally I don't
> > think it is fair to cast the large number of companies working on
> > TCPA all in the same light. [...]

> It doesn't matter much if some of them are ethical, it's the ones
> who aren't (the main players in this case) who worry me.

I think the word is 'compartmentalised'.

Let the white hats think they're working on something white by not
showing them what the black hats are up to.

Obviously all the players will have some idea what's going on, and can
put 2+2 together to some extent. "Why do we need to make these
machined HE blocks to convert a convex spherical shockwave into a
concave one? Doesn't matter, it's all for the war effort."

How many people (not bound by NDA) have a clear and detailed
big-picture understanding of TCPA?


Brian has said he expects open OSes to be more secure under TCPA, of
course under the proviso that insecure software is insecure.

What puzzles me is why the FBI & friends aren't showing more interest.
Secure computers in the hands of criminals are the last thing they
want. After what happened to Clipper, they've surely learned not to
try for a front door again. So, where's the back door?


> >>> (TCPA specifications are openly available).
> 
> We've been promised a clear document "soon" for some time now.

That reminds me of that bit of the MS FAQ.

| Q: Could Linux, FreeBSD or another open source OS create similar
| trust architecture?

The answer sounds like "of course you can, we'll choose which of our
patents we're going to use against you later".

I fail to see how something that's apparently so well thought out that
it's being integrated into a CPU can have so many loose ends that it's
impossible to discuss it sensibly.

> > For my part I am pleased that the specifications are subject to
> > change since some of the features need revision. And I have found
> > that the TCPA team does listen to input. But they are not psychic
> > so people do need to communicate with them.
> 
> But do they accept letter bombs? On reflection, cruise missiles on
> the tops of their pointy heads would be a better way to get their
> attention. It's a pity that they're not in fact psychic, their heads
> would have exploded by now from all the bad vibes.
> 
> Strange, at least one of the original authors is a nice guy. The
> road to hell...

Traditionally one paves one's own road to Hell with good intentions. I
can see that if someone else paves the road for you, then walking it
is much easier.


Matthew  #8-)