Posted on 06/23/2002 8:03:20 AM PDT by Brian Mosely
Sunday June 23, 10:51 am Eastern Time
NEW YORK, June 23 /PRNewswire/ --?Microsoft is developing a new system to improve computer security that will address concerns about privacy, security and intellectual property, Newsweek reports in the current issue. Among the several benefits of the ambitious long-range plan, called "Palladium": it will seal information from attackers, it will block many viruses and worms from your computer and it will allow users to participate in new services and applications that allow control of their personal information even after it leaves their computer. Palladium could even help keep out spam from your inbox. To ensure security, the system requires special security chips, which Intel and Advanced Microdevices have agreed to produce. "It's one of the most technically complex things ever attempted on the PC," says Gartner analyst Martin Reynolds.
Technology Editor Steven Levy previews the new system in the July 1 issue of Newsweek (on newsstands Monday, June 24). Though Microsoft does not claim a panacea to security and privacy concerns, the system is designed to dramatically improve the ability to control and protect personal and corporate information. Even more important, Levy reports, it's intended to become a new platform for a host of yet-unimagined services to enable privacy, commerce and entertainment in the coming decades. "This isn't just about solving problems, but expanding new realms of possibilities in the way people live and work with computers," says product manager Mario Juarez.
The plan will also limit what arrives (and runs on) your computer according to where it comes from and who creates it. It won't let others pretend to be you. The system uses high-level encryption to "seal" data so that snoops and thieves are thwarted. It is also being offered to the studios and record labels as a way to distribute music and film with "digital rights management" (DRM) which could allow users to exercise "fair use" (like making personal copies of a CD) and publishers could at least start releasing works that cut a compromise between free and locked-down.
One hurdle in establishing this trust technology is getting people to trust Microsoft, Levy writes. To diffuse the inevitable skepticism, the company has begun educational briefings of industry groups, security experts, government agencies and civil-liberties watchdogs and is taking the unusual step of publishing the system's source code. Early opinion-makers are giving them the benefit of the doubt. "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."
(Read Newsweek's news releases at
http://www.Newsweek.MSNBC.com. Click "Pressroom.")
It says so right there in the article:
It is also being offered to the studios and record labels as a way to distribute music and film with "digital rights management" (DRM)Remember the screaming fits of rage when Intel included a serial number in their CPUs? The same sorts of claims were made then. Have you read or heard anything that would lead you to believe any of the specious claims have come to pass?
The Big Brother possibilities didn't come to pass because Intel backed down.
And that's another reason why implementing mass-market user security in hardware is the dumbest idea this side of hiring Bill Clinton to chaperone the senior prom. You can't download new hardware over the Internet when the manufacturer releases a patch.
Yeah, just like Arafat.
What a bunch of idiots, to trust a decades-old organization of security specialists over MicroSieve.
For Hollywood, that's a feature, not a bug. You're supposed to be leering at Britney and listening to N'Stink (or maybe the other way around, since I don't know your gender or orientation), not trying to make competing music of your own.
Remember the screaming fits of rage when Intel included a serial number in their CPUs?
The Big Brother possibilities didn't come to pass because Intel backed down.
Well, IIRC, Intel went ahead and did what it wanted to do, but allowed a feature to turn it off.
If you will not check the source code for Mom, there are plenty of other eyes on the 'net that can and will.
If Mom is running "closed source", your only choice is to keep your prying eyes to yourself. This requires that you have blind faith in those that produced the proprietary code which is controlling Mom's machine.
It's not terribly difficult to grasp which code base is more likely to be trusted.
Your own mom uses Linux? ;-)
Well, somebody will review the code, and if Mom reads either the tech press or Slashdot, (heh-heh) she'll hear about it.
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.