On Friday 09 February 2007 18:26, Tim Thornton wrote:
...
> I can trust your computer not to reveal my secrets to you,

Do you not see how this is a bad thing - how this can be abused?

I buy a car. It does what I tell it (well it would if I drove). I buy
a hammer it bangs what I want to bang. I buy a phone. It phones where
I tell it. I buy a general purpose computer,  it does what I tell it.
Or should. I need to be able to trust *my* machines, if it doesn't do
what I tell it,  I can't trust it. I don't want *my* property keeping
secrets from me.

If you do not trust me, but wish to deliver it by machine, then it is
up to you to provide to me a machine *you* trust,  it is not up to me
to provide *you* a machine that you trust. 

Also, its a false "trust".  Your "secret" is audio and video.  That's
not a secret at all. 

BTW, I'm not arguing the /technology/ is broken. After all, using the
same technology  you can make things like secure personal storage are
more secure and trustable by the user:
   * http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/6633


Michael.
--
All the above are my opinions only.
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group.  To unsubscribe, please 
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.  
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/

Reply via email to