Pshaw... with our patent office? Hell, if it says "Microsoft" on the application the monkey with the "Approved" stamp will happily apply the ink to the paper.
----------------------Kaos-Keraunos-Kybernetos--------------------------- + ^ + :Surveillance cameras|Passwords are like underwear. You don't /|\ \|/ :aren't security. A |share them, you don't hang them on your/\|/\ <--*-->:camera won't stop a |monitor, or under your keyboard, you \/|\/ /|\ :masked killer, but |don't email them, or put them on a web \|/ + v + :will violate privacy|site, and you must change them very often. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.sunder.net ------------ On Thu, 20 Dec 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On 20 Dec 2001, at 9:20, Michael Motyka wrote: > > > My thought is that it is not novel in any way save that it witholds root access > > from the owner of the machine. > > > > I think it does a little more than that. "Deny the luser owner > root access" is sufficient to explain how the luser is prevented > from copying or modifying the trusted content, but it doesn't > explain how "trusted" apps can access the data. > In essence, deny the luser root access + all programs signed > by microsoft automatically run as root. Neither piece alone > would be innovative enough to be patentable, but maybe the combo > is. > > George >
