[Lvlug] Your next computer will be Microsoft controlled
Thu, 27 Jun 2002 01:31:24 -0400
I've been thinking more about this today and it's pretty scary.
We can state the obvious: Why would anyone place this kind of
responsiblity in the hands of a company that has proven time and again
unstrustworthy? First off, it sounds like they are essentially saying
that MS is not going to fix the bugs in their software, but instead put
restraints at the hardware level so those bugs are less exploitable. Of
course, this comes with the obvious license or fee for this service
because you know damn well MS is not going to offer this out of the
kindness of their hearts. Furthermore, evidence has proven that MS spies
on its customers. Not only that, but they make it easy for other
companies to do the same thing: Read spyware. Do other OS's have to
worry about spyware? I don't know of any spyware detectors for Linux or
The article I posted from newsforge makes the obvious connection that this
will be very hurtful to opensource and gpl software. I would also suggest
that it will hurt the smaller software companies as well who have to shell
out money for certification to the Palladium program. This cost will most
definetly be passed on to the consumer. A cost that will eventually make
MS products more econmically feasible in the long run since MS will not
have to further tax their own products (they are providing the service) or
they can mask it a lot better. Why bother spending money on fixing
security bugs in applications when Palladium will take care of it. So
again, is this a fair solution?
Speaking of opensource and gpl issues, Pallidium attacks one's fundamental
right to fair use. Ultimately, this would mean that if I created a nice
little binary from c++ to have tux run around my screen like that damn cat
does on some windows boxes, I could not share this with anyone unless I
paid to have the binary certified. Furthermore, who is going to want my
source code when they would have to use a certified compilier which would
probably not be free due to having to certify the compiler itself.
According to the gpl I can do whatever the hell I want with the software
so long as I publish my changes if I choose to redistribute the code or
binary. That's some pretty darn good freedom there. Not so, under
I wonder, if I write code would it even be compiliable under any compilier
unless I sent the code for certification?
The MSNBC article toutes how Palladium will stop spam and prevent spyware.
I really doubt this. Seriously, spam and spyware generate incredible
revenue. You think those companies are just going to roll over and say
"Ya got us there?" Hell no. They'll shell out their money to get
certified and the whole mess will continue just as it is now. How can you
stop it? Furthermore, why would MS turn down the revenue?
So if you boil it down, who really wins? Certainly not the end user.
While it Palladium might toute security, it's seems more a money makeing
scheme with a more insidious plan to take control over electronic
(specifically computer and network) exchange.
Didn't the article go on to talk about Palladium based PDA's, watches,
phones, etc? Who the hell needs Palladium in a watch. Is some hacker
going to change your timezone on you? Yes I know there are watches that
can do far more than tell the time and act as a calculator.
Ahh...That's enough ranting for tonite. I think it is pretty insidious.
What's more, I find it a bit unconforting that they push this service
referencing terrorism and Sept 11. That's really sick playing on such
tragedies. Like Palladium would make any kind of dent in terrorism.
Daniel S. Washko
Lehigh Valley Linux Users Group
get slack (www.slackware.com ) and get happy