MESSAGE
| DATE | 2002-11-07 |
| FROM | Ruben Safir
|
| SUBJECT | Subject: [hangout] Re: [DMCA-Activists] MSNBC / AP on "Trusted Computing"
|
From owner-hangout-desteny-at-mrbrklyn.com Thu Nov 7 07:54:11 2002
Received: from www2.mrbrklyn.com (LOCALHOST [127.0.0.1]) by mrbrklyn.com (8.12.3/8.11.2/SuSE Linux 8.11.1-0.5) with ESMTP id gA7CsBJe023478 for ; Thu, 7 Nov 2002 07:54:11 -0500
Received: (from mdom-at-localhost) by www2.mrbrklyn.com (8.12.3/8.12.3/Submit) id gA7CsB0n023477 for hangout-desteny; Thu, 7 Nov 2002 07:54:11 -0500
X-Authentication-Warning: www2.mrbrklyn.com: mdom set sender to owner-hangout-at-www2.mrbrklyn.com using -f
Received: from www2.mrbrklyn.com (LOCALHOST [127.0.0.1]) by mrbrklyn.com (8.12.3/8.11.2/SuSE Linux 8.11.1-0.5) with ESMTP id gA7Cs1Je023462; Thu, 7 Nov 2002 07:54:01 -0500
Received: (from ruben-at-localhost) by www2.mrbrklyn.com (8.12.3/8.12.3/Submit) id gA7Cs1Og023461; Thu, 7 Nov 2002 07:54:01 -0500
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2002 07:54:01 -0500
From: Ruben Safir
To: dmca-activists-at-gnu.org
Cc: hangout-at-nylxs.com, C-FIT_Community-at-RealMeasures.dyndns.org, C-FIT_Release_Community-at-RealMeasures.dyndns.org, fairuse-at-nylxs.com, DMCA_Discuss-at-lists.microshaft.org
Subject: [hangout] Re: [DMCA-Activists] MSNBC / AP on "Trusted Computing"
Message-ID: <20021107125401.GA23396-at-www2.mrbrklyn.com>
References: <3DCA59E7.9FC76B76-at-RealMeasures.dyndns.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <3DCA59E7.9FC76B76-at-RealMeasures.dyndns.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.27i
Sender: owner-hangout-at-mrbrklyn.com
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Ruben Safir
List: New Yorkers Linux Scene
Admin: To unsubscribe send unsubscribename-at-domian.com to hangout-request-at-www2.mrbrklyn.com
X-Evolution: 00000185-0000
Content-Length: 10569
Lines: 294
Status: RO
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 6490
Yeah
But they probibly would have been able to do this if You Jay
and Brett didn't screw up the efforts of NY Fair Use because we
would have been all over the press right after July. But your
ego's were more important than real political action, and you
just continue to chase ghosts like a dog chasing it's tail.
And your continueing to screw with NY Fair Use and obstruct it
efforts to the point where we needed to hire bouncers for our meetings
now.
GOOD Work...
And now your back to promoting you "data" strategry. That's
good. The public is going to not only undestand that, but it's going
to motivate them to vote against their Congressman. Let me know when your
really sick of loosing the war on this and your ready to actually win.
And why waste your time sendng this. Send your complaints to the
press. You know, letter to the editor. We already know.
Ruben
On Thu, Nov 07, 2002 at 07:17:43AM -0500, Seth Johnson wrote:
>
> Dave Farber posted this "balanced" piece to the Interesting
> People list. The article presents some new smooth talk.
> Note that the article enumerates "a check of a database"
> among the items proposed to be covered -- showing that the
> American legal view of *data itself* (i.e., facts and ideas)
> is being sought to be overridden (i.e., as per Feist
> Publications).
>
> See how they present the automated, assured *license
> compliance* model that these schemes represent in the
> following passage -- *not* a free framework reflecting a
> principled understanding of what exclusive rights mean in a
> free society (such as we find embodied in the American
> Constitution and in copyright jurisprudence -- or in
> copyleft):
>
> > Scott Charney, Microsoft's chief security strategist,
> > said users and providers will set the rules just as
> > they do today. The difference, he said, is that the
> > new technologies will create a secure environment for
> > enforcing those rules.
>
> Seth
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Date: Wed, 06 Nov 2002 15:47:29 -0500
> From: Dave Farber
> To: ip
>
> [ I am not sure this helps all that much but there is a more
> balanced view than some of the stuff written. There is still
> much to much emotion and much too little facts . Djf]
>
>
> MSNBC
>
> Critics wary of'trusted computing'
>
> Computer firms promise better security, but at what price?
>
> ASSOCIATED PRESS
>
> SAN JOSE, Calif., Nov. 5 To thwart hackers and foster
> online commerce, the next generation of computers will
> almost certainly cede some control to software firms,
> Hollywood and other outsiders. That could break a
> long-standing tenet of computing: that PC owners ultimately
> control data on their own machines.
>
> MICROSOFT CALLS ITS technology "Palladium." Intel dubs it
> "LaGrande." An industry group that includes these companies,
> IBM, Hewlett-Packard and 170 others terms it "trusted
> computing."
>
> (MSNBC is a Microsoft - NBC joint venture.)
>
> Though the initiatives have technical differences, they
> share the goal of hardwiring security into silicon and
> related software a leap beyond today's less-secure
> mechanisms, which are coded into programs to protect data.
>
> "This is a fundamentally new approach as opposed to taking a
> software-only, Band-Aid approach," said Narendar Sahgal, a
> software planning manager at Intel.
>
> The efforts would help protect movies and other digital
> content from piracy and even personal copying, and critics
> see few benefits for consumers.
>
> "I don't think the kind of trustworthiness they seek to
> deliver is at all desirable," said Ross Anderson, a security
> researcher at Cambridge University. "It's not security for
> me. It's security for them."
>
> PLATFORMS, NOT POLICIES
>
> The companies and content providers behind the initiative
> claim that by protecting data from external attacks and
> unlawful trading they'll be able to unlock the potential of
> computing itself.
>
> The key is creating a realm in computing where each bit of
> communication - an e-mail, an online purchase, a check of a
> database, the reading of a document can be achieved only by
> interacting with secured, uniquely identified hardware
> through "trusted agents."
>
> Each agent would enforce policies set by senders,
> recipients, copyright holders or a combination that would
> decide how the content can be used.
>
> In this realm, Hollywood could safely release its works. The
> health care and financial industries could communicate with
> clients without fear of leaks. And ordinary users could rest
> assured that critical information won't be stolen or wrecked
> by the virus du jour or hackers.
>
> "There are certain transactions and certain businesses where
> you need to understand and trust the device you're talking
> to," said Scott Dinsdale, executive vice president of
> digital strategy for the Motion Picture Association of
> America.
>
> Developers of the new technology say they're just building
> trusted platforms, not setting any policies for using them.
>
> All emphasize that specific tasks such as managing digital
> rights can be built on top of their technologies but are
> not part of the
> initiatives.
>
> Peter Biddle, Microsoft's product manager for Palladium,
> said it would not empower copyright holders to reach into
> consumers' computers and make "untrusted" documents such as
> music files disappear.
>
> In fact, he said, users could use Palladium to protect
> content from scans and hacks by copyright holders, who have
> lately employed intrusive methods in a bid to curb piracy.
>
> VIRTUAL VAULTS
>
> Computers with the new capabilities are not expected for
> several years, but critics say the details released so far
> do not bode well for open computing.
>
> Trustworthiness would be achieved by giving users two
> choices: trusted and untrusted. On a computer running in
> untrusted mode, nformation would be shared just as it has
> been for the past 20 years. It's also still vulnerable to
> attack.
>
> The trusted realm, however, would be immune from such
> attack. Data and memory would be contained in a virtual
> vault. Keys would be held by a chip that lets in only
> trusted software.
>
> Content creators could write and enforce rules that
> determine whether a file could, for instance, be distributed
> or printed. They could prohibit untrusted machines from
> accessing a trusted document.
>
> Palladium, LaGrande and others are being designed to enforce
> existing rules and ones devised in the future.
>
> Scott Charney, Microsoft's chief security strategist, said
> users and providers will set the rules just as they do
> today. The difference, he said, is that the new technologies
> will create a secure environment for enforcing those rules.
>
> Critics fear, however, that it will be the end user who
> might end up being trusted the least in the brave new world
> of trusted computing.
>
> Creators of trusted programs could resort to draconian
> tactics to ensure their policies are enforced, Anderson
> said.
>
> Programs found to be illegally copied could be rendered
> useless remotely. Sensitive e-mail, which might be useful
> in investigations, could vanish. And e-books could be
> subjected to virtual book burnings.
>
> Industry pioneer David P. Reed, formerly the chief scientist
> at Lotus Development Corp., called the initiatives "booby
> traps."
>
> "I'm personally angry and disgusted that ... companies that
> grew up because of the personal computer revolution, which
> empowered users, are now acting to harm the users," Reed
> said.
>
> OPTING OUT
>
> Supporters, however, argue that the new architecture will
> create more opportunities than it limits, as more and more
> consumers and content providers try things they now avoid
> because of insecurity.
>
> Biddle said laws and regulations that now protect sensitive
> documents from shredding also should bar the destruction of
> e-mail or other computer-generated material.
>
> Moreover, users will continue to have control, because they
> can always choose not run the security features, Charney and
> other trusted-computing supporters say.
>
> But those who refuse risk limiting choices, just as people
> who refuse to buy the Windows operating system are closed
> out of a computing world dominated by Microsoft, Anderson
> said.
>
> Seth Schoen, staff technologist at the Electronic Frontier
> Foundation, said incompatibility is the biggest threat
> posted by the trusted-computing initiatives.
>
> "I don't think anyone can absolutely compel you to do
> anything in particular," he said. "What they can do is
> create an incompatibility or refuse to deal with you unless
> you meet a particular condition."
>
> Charney promised that Microsoft will not misuse the
> technology.
>
> "Listen to what we say and watch what we do. Actions speak
> louder than words," Charney said. "And then if we're saying
> 'X' but doing 'Y,' not only will we lose trust but our brand
> is hurt and we lose market share."
>
> © 2002 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material
> may not be published, broadcast
> *********************************
>
> Lillie Coney
> Public Policy Coordinator
> U.S. Association for Computing Machinery
> Suite 510
> 2120 L Street, NW
> Washington, D.C. 20037
> 202-478-6124
> lillie.coney-at-acm.org
>
>
> ------ End of Forwarded Message
>
> _______________________________________________
> Drm-class mailing list
> Drm-class-at-boiling.fluid.cs.cmu.edu
> http://boiling.fluid.cs.cmu.edu/mailman/listinfo/drm-class
>
>
> ------ End of Forwarded Message
>
> -------------------------------------
>
> Archives at:
> http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> DMCA-Activists mailing list
> DMCA-Activists-at-gnu.org
> http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/dmca-activists
--
__________________________
Brooklyn Linux Solutions
__________________________
DRM is THEFT - We are the STAKEHOLDERS http://fairuse.nylxs.com
http://www.mrbrklyn.com - Consulting
http://www.inns.net <-- Happy Clients
http://www.nylxs.com - Leadership Development in Free Software
http://www2.mrbrklyn.com/resources - Unpublished Archive or stories and articles from around the net
http://www2.mrbrklyn.com/downtown.html - See the New Downtown Brooklyn....
1-718-382-0585
____________________________
New Yorker Free Software Users Scene
Fair Use -
because it's either fair use or useless....
|
|
