The Trusted Computing Group (TCG), successor to the Trusted Computing Platform Alliance (TCPA), is a controversial initiative led by AMD, Hewlett-Packard, IBM, Intel, Microsoft, Sony, and Sun Microsystems to implement trusted computing.TCG's original major goal was the development of a Trusted Platform Module (TPM), a hardware intellectual property block or integrated circuit that conforms to the trusted platform module specification put forward by the Trusted Computing Group and is to be included with computers to enable trusted computing features. TCG-compliant functionality has since been integrated directly into certain mass-market chipsets.
The Trusted Computing Group (TCG) is an alliance of Microsoft, Intel, IBM, HP and AMD which promotes a standard for a `more secure' PC. Their definition of `security' is controversial; machines built according to their specification will be more trustworthy from the point of view of software vendors and the content industry, but will be less trustworthy from the point of view of their owners. In effect, the TCG specification will transfer the ultimate control of your PC from you to whoever wrote the software it happens to be running. (Yes, even more so than at present.)
The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) is a controversial United States copyright law. The act criminalizes production and dissemination of technology that can circumvent measures taken to protect copyright, not merely infringement of copyright itself, and heightens the penalties for copyright infringement on the Internet. Passed on May 14, 1998 by a unanimous vote in the United States Senate and signed into law by President Bill Clinton on October 28, 1998, the DMCA amended title 17 of the US Code to extend the reach of copyright, while limiting the liability of Online Providers from copyright infringement by their users.
TCPA is good stuff, DMCA (and in EU, EUCD) is what makes its applications a bad thing.
Oh dear god NO at the definition of trusted computing there! That FAQ is also crap. The real problem isn't the technology, the problem is completely different from TCPA. TCPA is good stuff, DMCA (and in EU, EUCD) is what makes its applications a bad thing. But that doesn't apply to just implementations using TCPA, these laws make a lot of other things equally uneasy.
Sorry for the slow responses, I don't check here often, been busy nowadays. (I suppose you've seen me linked from boingboing, sysinternals, etc)TCPA would make remote server management securely a lot more fun, as it'd be significantly harder to own the system in a way that can't be noticed. It's common in the linux world for a server to be owned and sshd switched to a version that logs passwords. With TCPA, you could have your linux system where this kind of attack is simply impossible to do, because you could authenticate against isolated code...
<3M> ok guys i've finally got my windows me machine up and running again if everything seems to be running well on windows me you've obviously overlooked something....<3M> who is general failure and why is he reading my hard disc somehow, "i told you so" doesn't quite say it
Annorax, not quite so. IMO, that's backwards logic that stems from trying to understand a system based on a description rather than specification. You don't need TCPA to have software providers control your system, if they ship the software they decide what your system does and that's it. This kind of mechanism doesn't need TCPA to be implemented, and I don't see how TCPA is a factor in this at all.If you want to talk about risks, please mention something that cannot be implemented already or that actually gets worse somehow. TCPA doesn't change what's legal and what isn't, which seems to be something you assume.