Correction, you must read --> I think end users can control TPM since they *sould* own the private key.
On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 1:33 AM, Michael Faille <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hello all, > > I think end users can control TPM since they must own private key. > > So, where is the probleme with TPM? It's like data encryption for me. > > The problem is the misuse of TPM (when motherboard owner didn't own the > privatekey). It's like the misuse of UEFI : > http://www.fsf.org/campaigns/secure-boot-vs-restricted-boot/ > > My 2 cents, > -- > Michael Faille > > On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 1:24 AM, David C Dawson <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Quick response -- >> I regard these strictly as concepts: >> I think of 'TPM' as a superset of 'DRM'. >> Both are a convenient fiction. >> They both give a 'rights holder' cart blanche, up to a point. >> but 'TPM' provides more scope for abuse - terrifyingly so in my view. >> >> I sent the link to Matthew Skala's excellent article because >> I thought his line of reasoning could be developed further to >> encompass 'TPM' >> >> I think, already that his article demonstrates the sort of thinking >> from which the 'DRM' concept came - that is, 'DRM' is supposed to be >> able to make 'content' 'change colour' if 'DRM' is circumvented. >> >> That might be fuzzy thinking in my feeble old brain. but there it is. >> >> Is it useful and/or possible to ask Matthew Skala for his input on this? >> /Dave >> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 03:51:34PM -0500, Russell McOrmond wrote: >> > >> > On 12-02-17 01:09 PM, David C Dawson wrote: >> > >Please take a look at this link: >> > >http://ansuz.sooke.bc.ca/entry/23 >> > >> > I did, back in 2004. I also skimmed again today to remind me of content. >> > >> > Matthew Skala is one of the people who has been actively involved >> > in this area of policy from the beginning, including on the general >> > digital-copyright.ca forums. (even back when it was still called >> > canada-dmca-opponents http://www.digital-copyright.ca/discuss/10 ) >> > >> > >> > >> > Curious what made you think of it? >> > >> > The colour being discussed in the article is a human trait, and >> > one of the obvious failings of attempts at "DRM" (however you want >> > to define that acronym) is to try to program computers to make human >> > decisions. Even if we can make sentient computers, they still won't >> > be human. Computers can help humans with metadata to make good >> > decisions, but can't make those human decisions for us. >> > >> > >> > It is separate from the question of how rules for decisions are >> > encoded (in software) and where are those decisions made (in >> > hardware, not in "content") when those decisions are made by a >> > computer. The colour of the bits of the content addresses a >> > different set of confusions between technical and non-technical >> > people. >> > >> > -- >> > Russell McOrmond, Internet Consultant: <http://www.flora.ca/> >> > Please help us tell the Canadian Parliament to protect our property >> > rights as owners of Information Technology. Sign the petition! >> > http://l.c11.ca/ict >> > >> > "The government, lobbied by legacy copyright holders and hardware >> > manufacturers, can pry my camcorder, computer, home theatre, or >> > portable media player from my cold dead hands!" >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > fsfc-discuss mailing list >> > [email protected] >> > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/fsfc-discuss >> >> -- >> David Dawson VE7HP VE7HDC >> IRC: (Freenode) VE7HP >> >> _______________________________________________ >> fsfc-discuss mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/fsfc-discuss > > _______________________________________________ fsfc-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/fsfc-discuss
