Re: CPU as a service // MINIX in Intel ME
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 11/28/2017 04:47 PM, White_Rabbit wrote: > Il 28 novembre 2017 22:33:06 CET, Timothy Pearson > ha scritto: >> […] Think about that: *games*. Giving >> up >> privacy and control to waste time in front of a *game*. […] > (I'm sorry, I know this is not a reasonable use of the list) > You've never played "Metal Gear Solid", have you? I might have drunk the > koolaid, but I really believe videogames can be a revolutionary medium of > expression, much like books, paintings, sculptures, movies, comics... > To dismiss them like you did, if it's not hyperbole, is wrong. > I value freedom more than videogames, but they can be much more than you make > them sound. Oh, I agree they are a valuable artistic medium, and I have a few myself that I greatly enjoy. However, not only do I disagree with the onerous EULA for many of the larger titles, but I strongly object to the game copyright extending beyond 20 years or so, especially when the manufacturer won't update or sell the game any more after only a year or two post release. I only object to people giving up their privacy, control, etc. over other aspects of their life because the game is considered more important. That is the wrong attitude; the game may be valuable, but is it really more valuable than anything the individual might ever create (or want to create) using a computer? Locked-down x86 boxes are practically a dime a dozen; gaming can be easily done on one of those while real work is done elsewhere. But trying to get people to understand this has yielded unexpected resistance, largely due to the costs of then having to maintain two separate computers. I really don't know what to do to fix this, as I don't think it *can* be fixed given the issues of the x86 platform. Personally, I keep all of the DRM boxes separate and isolated. Amazon streaming goes through a dedicated "garbage" PC that never sees any personal data, etc. No idea if others are willing adopt this model or will just surrender the last shreds of their personal life to keep up with games and streaming video... - -- Timothy Pearson Raptor Engineering +1 (415) 727-8645 (direct line) +1 (512) 690-0200 (switchboard) https://www.raptorengineering.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1 iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJaHeszAAoJEK+E3vEXDOFb2C8H/iY9OpjP8OE3MdCdbHLF3yfl gth28MyaZf0HEYhrcwq/xqfB5iZVBfQHxE238E29ehGmdBm9vhFtYu/cFCG53ZjE kT3mDWFJhg78qXvbcBAMYSfptN7FY1t9EIqd/GYNOeN68jlmKCnHN2rzRHMAtQtu HCDxjjWzaqt8tkR5tiGDKKMYfPzdVCKkGjsyhEcra1VB7URe4QIjCUcZWeYTQ72n X1Me5fxlCqEAh6KBHZwCZqzhu8UhhZyugVkO0f1rmKcNrTWwBtJsCEYMb3/qdpNI MYUFORxqPEvANSugLjbDQL8NmjcDypq9ZlO2h3KAjXWeLRwAMGMJe5MB5cG1b/g= =PFG3 -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Re: CPU as a service // MINIX in Intel ME
Il 28 novembre 2017 22:33:06 CET, Timothy Pearson ha scritto: >[…] Think about that: *games*. Giving >up >privacy and control to waste time in front of a *game*. […] (I'm sorry, I know this is not a reasonable use of the list) You've never played "Metal Gear Solid", have you? I might have drunk the koolaid, but I really believe videogames can be a revolutionary medium of expression, much like books, paintings, sculptures, movies, comics... To dismiss them like you did, if it's not hyperbole, is wrong. I value freedom more than videogames, but they can be much more than you make them sound. ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Re: CPU as a service has come!
On Monday 27. November 2017 13.52.55 Giovanni Biscuolo wrote: > > please also consider that many respectable free software supporters are > proposing solutions that are **useless tech workarounds**; e.g. looking at > https://privacylab.yale.edu/ , in the "What we do" box, I read: "Hosting > Tor", "providing TAILS OS", "hardened GNU/Linux", privacy-respecting tools > such as PGP/GPG e-mail and E2EE messaging... I know that you're trying to communicate that control of the hardware is essential, but those other things still complement efforts to maintain overall control of our computing environments, uphold privacy, and so on. As such, they are not useless. Only if they are being proposed as complete solutions can they be considered as useless, ineffective or giving a false sense of security (workarounds, as you note). But at the same time, you wouldn't advocate controlling the hardware and then openly wonder why anyone would bother encrypting things or running secure operating systems. So we need to consider all of these things, or at least many of them. These days, I constantly find myself reminding people to beware of the zero-sum game, as they promote their favourite things at the expense of other, equally worthwhile things. This is no different. Paul ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Re: CPU as a service // MINIX in Intel ME
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I was using "unlicensed" somewhat facetiously from a large content provider perspective; specifically, in the common usage of "not paying a license fee back to the vendor on a continuous basis". The general idea was that the machine vendor wants to see a financial kickback after sale in return for leasing the hardware to the end user at or near cost -- this is what motivates the preinstalled bloatware and things like SuperFish. Sorry for the confusion! On 11/28/2017 03:45 PM, Adonay Felipe Nogueira wrote: > Jost to note that not all copies of Linux are unlicensed. > > The unlicensed ones are those shipped or provided by non-free system > distributions that happen to break the terms of the license (currently: > 99%). > > Besides, the Linux project itself seems to currently put non-free parts > inside it so, one always has to do some cleanup even if getting a copy > from Linux project itself. > > 2017-11-28T15:33:06-0600 Timothy Pearson wrote: >> On 11/28/2017 03:23 PM, Jann KRUSE wrote: >>> In short: >>> We are essentially being forced, without even being told, to run buggy >>> proprietary code in a very powerful and very capable hyper-hyper-visor >>> of our OS, which can (benign or maliciously) control both the (free) >>> software we run and the hardware we "own", without our knowledge. >>> (See also in-line comment below..) >>> >>> Greetings, >>> Jann >>> PGP 0xE7A47A578A30148A >> >> As before, though, you're only forced into this you need to stay on x86. >> >> IMHO part of the reasoning for this lockdown is that the majority of x86 >> sales by volume are still to consumers. Therefore, there is strong call >> to prevent the machine lessee (hesitate to call anyone bound by an EULA >> an "owner") from doing anything that might be considered unacceptable >> (e.g. breaking DRM, posting restricted content, using unlicensed >> software like Linux, possibly even depending on region criticising the >> authorities). We're already seeing some of this in the wild in that the >> 4k streaming services require the ME and its DRM in order to run. >> >> It's still early enough to at least forcibly split "production", >> owner-controlled hardware from the "consumption" leased hardware. >> However this only happens if people support the vendors that are still >> making owner controlled hardware by selecting their products over the >> competing leased x86 systems. >> >> Anecdotally, I have personally seen way too many people supposedly >> interested in libre software that are literally locking themselves into >> the x86 walled garden over games. Think about that: *games*. Giving up >> privacy and control to waste time in front of a *game*. This is the >> mentality that needs to be fixed, that somehow consuming content is more >> important than being able to create it. No idea how to do that right now. >> >> As always, just my $0.02. > - -- Timothy Pearson Raptor Engineering +1 (415) 727-8645 (direct line) +1 (512) 690-0200 (switchboard) https://www.raptorengineering.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1 iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJaHdn9AAoJEK+E3vEXDOFbTesH/iM1Pq9XbFMQxTrlGOcMMUMj NIjGlYbngAhU7YHv+mD2p2tscLLQjo3WTUci7UQHx1JR4PXl188yQv/YAPbnxopc HJv/iPDFOGr1zEJRSFKdLYQTwczgpwP2DOG9SJZHM6GSsSpoiejv8jSUzMmUtNPl 3jiMMFy8XEkHGzJNJ5/WAYJ7sXAlB2mMCj1DsG3bA4mrDS6i8XopVxD63slOLDcq TDb/CbeEAeV+nJeheC3ihYVdJBlheahwlVEgOcugsk4Vzp6+OWkso+ta650Oy+iQ Gf6fCIkPGx1vrtVCsqiS6nRId7rL4TM/IYjrFm507gXre98ZoqAcAVD66XctO5c= =C6d3 -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Re: CPU as a service // MINIX in Intel ME
Jost to note that not all copies of Linux are unlicensed. The unlicensed ones are those shipped or provided by non-free system distributions that happen to break the terms of the license (currently: 99%). Besides, the Linux project itself seems to currently put non-free parts inside it so, one always has to do some cleanup even if getting a copy from Linux project itself. 2017-11-28T15:33:06-0600 Timothy Pearson wrote: > On 11/28/2017 03:23 PM, Jann KRUSE wrote: >> In short: >> We are essentially being forced, without even being told, to run buggy >> proprietary code in a very powerful and very capable hyper-hyper-visor >> of our OS, which can (benign or maliciously) control both the (free) >> software we run and the hardware we "own", without our knowledge. >> (See also in-line comment below..) >> >> Greetings, >> Jann >> PGP 0xE7A47A578A30148A > > As before, though, you're only forced into this you need to stay on x86. > > IMHO part of the reasoning for this lockdown is that the majority of x86 > sales by volume are still to consumers. Therefore, there is strong call > to prevent the machine lessee (hesitate to call anyone bound by an EULA > an "owner") from doing anything that might be considered unacceptable > (e.g. breaking DRM, posting restricted content, using unlicensed > software like Linux, possibly even depending on region criticising the > authorities). We're already seeing some of this in the wild in that the > 4k streaming services require the ME and its DRM in order to run. > > It's still early enough to at least forcibly split "production", > owner-controlled hardware from the "consumption" leased hardware. > However this only happens if people support the vendors that are still > making owner controlled hardware by selecting their products over the > competing leased x86 systems. > > Anecdotally, I have personally seen way too many people supposedly > interested in libre software that are literally locking themselves into > the x86 walled garden over games. Think about that: *games*. Giving up > privacy and control to waste time in front of a *game*. This is the > mentality that needs to be fixed, that somehow consuming content is more > important than being able to create it. No idea how to do that right now. > > As always, just my $0.02. -- - https://libreplanet.org/wiki/User:Adfeno - Palestrante e consultor sobre /software/ livre (não confundir com gratis). - "WhatsApp"? Ele não é livre. Por favor, veja formas de se comunicar instantaneamente comigo no endereço abaixo. - Contato: https://libreplanet.org/wiki/User:Adfeno#vCard - Arquivos comuns aceitos (apenas sem DRM): Corel Draw, Microsoft Office, MP3, MP4, WMA, WMV. - Arquivos comuns aceitos e enviados: CSV, GNU Dia, GNU Emacs Org, GNU GIMP, Inkscape SVG, JPG, LibreOffice (padrão ODF), OGG, OPUS, PDF (apenas sem DRM), PNG, TXT, WEBM. ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Re: CPU as a service // MINIX in Intel ME
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 11/28/2017 03:23 PM, Jann KRUSE wrote: > In short: > We are essentially being forced, without even being told, to run buggy > proprietary code in a very powerful and very capable hyper-hyper-visor > of our OS, which can (benign or maliciously) control both the (free) > software we run and the hardware we "own", without our knowledge. > (See also in-line comment below..) > > Greetings, > Jann > PGP 0xE7A47A578A30148A As before, though, you're only forced into this you need to stay on x86. IMHO part of the reasoning for this lockdown is that the majority of x86 sales by volume are still to consumers. Therefore, there is strong call to prevent the machine lessee (hesitate to call anyone bound by an EULA an "owner") from doing anything that might be considered unacceptable (e.g. breaking DRM, posting restricted content, using unlicensed software like Linux, possibly even depending on region criticising the authorities). We're already seeing some of this in the wild in that the 4k streaming services require the ME and its DRM in order to run. It's still early enough to at least forcibly split "production", owner-controlled hardware from the "consumption" leased hardware. However this only happens if people support the vendors that are still making owner controlled hardware by selecting their products over the competing leased x86 systems. Anecdotally, I have personally seen way too many people supposedly interested in libre software that are literally locking themselves into the x86 walled garden over games. Think about that: *games*. Giving up privacy and control to waste time in front of a *game*. This is the mentality that needs to be fixed, that somehow consuming content is more important than being able to create it. No idea how to do that right now. As always, just my $0.02. - -- Timothy Pearson Raptor Engineering +1 (415) 727-8645 (direct line) +1 (512) 690-0200 (switchboard) https://www.raptorengineering.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1 iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJaHdYMAAoJEK+E3vEXDOFbGZ4H/3a9W/NzuaVlB2TcywMfJRzx A9Ap9adHOLuvsfQwAxHv93GNoJ8g8LOhjwNPV1YUoERgJaYKEtD0SZYjpIVLYmwU xpImdBbaX5g9PGgeKRF4+I6Ixr/kq9V+EpcyaNvOWVt2U7F0Qlv68CCFsG/Tmg8Q kO3wY4tvc5BzKv5aeaVadU//XPs9rD1DFNqerBYLk4Z2qxkYCM5EMPfbcR97dEJC +ljwtsyVQouWKoppPRcjznDKPR6G9Dpd/s8Em23V4RU+Ky0VFpS9Y+p7XOR6L6EG Gz3UoeHh+87JFew5UHG07GLj4PO6fPjZkt2KLp3j7p6S3qsTFSIQPKOktVKnQ98= =lIKQ -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Re: CPU as a service // MINIX in Intel ME
On 24 November 2017 18:19:23 EET, Giovanni Biscuolo wrote: >[...] > >2. between the "user facing OS" and the hardware there are at least 2 ½ >OS kernels (MINIX and UEFI) >3. these are proprietary and very likely exploit-friendly Update: Have been exploited... (And you wouldn't even realize it!) https://www.blackhat.com/eu-17/briefings/schedule/#how-to-hack-a-turned-off-computer-or-running-unsigned-code-in-intel-management-engine-8668 >4. the exploits can persist, i.e. be written to FLASH, and you can't >fix that > [...] In short: We are essentially being forced, without even being told, to run buggy proprietary code in a very powerful and very capable hyper-hyper-visor of our OS, which can (benign or maliciously) control both the (free) software we run and the hardware we "own", without our knowledge. (See also in-line comment below..) Greetings, Jann PGP 0xE7A47A578A30148A___ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
