Hardware security sneaks into PCs

[whatthe]

http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1009_22-5...=zdfd.newsfeed

"Our success is not dependent on Microsoft,"

Maybe not, but with their market share I can't see it being that successful without MS making Longhorn compatible.

The technology locks specialized encryption keys in a data vault--essentially a chip on the computer's motherboard. Computers with the feature can wall off data, secure communications and identify systems belonging to the company or to business partners. That means companies can improve the security of access to corporate data, even when the PC is not connected to a network.

[rcgreen]

This is the greatest threat to the PC in its entire history.
It would be a set of blockages, limitations, and impairments
that would destroy the flexibility of the computer, transforming
it into a passive entertainment device that would be forced to honor
all the DRM code that hollywood wants to embed in its entertainment files.

Your hard drive would not be able to save a file unless the "security" chip gave the OK.
Every file or piece of data that passed through your machine would carry certain
permissions that your hardware would enforce ruthlessly. In one
scenario I heard of, a "whistleblower" at some company might
try to leak evidence against his boss to the
press, but the memo would fail to
appear on the reporter's PC
because of Such
censorship.

I say "NO! to all hardware-based security solutions.
They would be a noose that would eventually
hang us all.

[whatthe]

I imagine viruses would soon arrive on the scene to use the technology for its own purposes (damage decryption ability, etc). You try to access your walled up data only to find another wall between you and the data.

[Highlander]

Personally I would see a Data only available if the following takes place

Login Name (Now!)

Password (Now1)

PC Hardware Fingerprint :IE mac address, hardware config, etc.... (future!)

PC Software fingerprint :IE what software is installed, checksums of a combination of software (future!)

How or where it is login from (Now!)

What comm protocals and services are active on a PC (future!)

Use of encription when connected (Now!)

There may be other ways out there.... But who knows what the future will bring... It will be different.

[phishphreek]

Hmm... so the software crackers out there will have to take a back seat to all the EE's who will find a way to litterally hack up the hardware to ignore the DRM...

It happens with game consoles... why not with PCs?

I just find it a bit depressing that I'm going to have to install mod chips on my PCs so I can decide with which media players I want to watch/listen to which media, etc.

Pretty soon you'll need to install a mod chip on any machine that comes with the "built/designed for <insert m$ OS here>" sticker on the front of the tower just to install another OS.

They can say... "well, it was right on the front of the box! We didn't force you to use our operating system... you should have known when you bought it!"

[zencoder]

I have an idea why Microsoft won't discuss NGSCB much...they are too busy making it all work...XboX2, Longhorn, and all... http://money.cnn.com/2004/05/26/comm...column_gaming/

And to be honest, I don't think it's a bad idea...for a gaming console. I sure as hell wish I could do more with my XboX without buying a mod-chip and violating my EULA. (That sounds rather naughty..."would you like to violate my EULA?")

If I could throw my old PC games on my Xbox NG-PC-2 thingy and play them...on my HD-TV (like I play my current Xbox games), I'd glady pay more for XboxNG-whaddevah than I did for this old Xbox. And if it plays legacy AND modern pc games, so much the better...peripheral compatibilty, etc. I would love all that...but I don't think that is going to come to fruition. They make too much money on licensing and selling proprietary hardware. The 'Universal Serial Bus' controllers on Xbox are not.

But when asked if Xbox2 would have Longhorn and the new DirectX code at its core, Dean Lester (Windows Graphics and Gaming manager) declined to comment.
http://www.gamespot.com/news/2004/09...s_6108247.html
HHHHhhhmmmmmmmmmmmm. Maybe Microsoft isn't saying much because they don't HAVE to...because they are ALREADY using the code specs that Intel, Dell, et al have subscribed to?

[ams2d]

Another article on this topic

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4360793.stm

Eventually the TPM will be built into the main processor itself, and if the trusted computing group has its way then you will find one in every piece of hardware you own, from mobile phones to TV set top boxes to children's toys.

But for the moment it is a separate piece of hardware, providing enhanced security features to programs that know how to use them.

Hardware security is less common, even if it is a lot safer.

This is partly because it is more expensive to give someone a smartcard than a password, but also because its more work for users, systems administrators and managers.

As a result we settle for second best.

[rapier57]

I'm kind of concerned about the application and implementation. Management from a systems admin perspective sounds like a nightmare. And, what happens when a user in a high-turnover environment like ours (education) modifies the encryption chip and renders the system unusable for anyone else? Yeah, this will just push us away from buying workstations for the student classrooms and such now. We'll probably go thin client and VMs.