I agree with everything you say, David, until here.
As for remote attestion, it's true that it does not directly let a remote
party control your computer. I never claimed that. Rather, it enables
remote parties to exert control over your computer in a way that is
not possible without remote attestation. The mechanism is different,
but the end result is similar.
If that is the case, then strong authentication provides the same degree of control over your computer. With remote attestation, the distant end determines if they wish to communicate with you based on the fingerprint of your configuration. With strong authentication, the distant end determines if they wish to communicate with you based on your identity.
I just don't see remote attestation as providing control over your computer provided the user/owner has control over when and if remote attestation is used. Further, I can think of several instances where remote attestation is a good thing. For example, a privacy P2P file sharing network. You wouldn't want to share your files with an RIAA modified version of the program that's designed to break the anonymity of the network.
--------------------------------------------------------------------- The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
