AARG! Wrote: > In addition, I have argued that trusted computing in general > will work very well with open source software. It may even > be possible to allow the user to build the executable himself > using a standard compilation environment.
What AARG! is failing to mention is that Microsoft holds that Palladium, and in particular Trusted Operating Root ("nub") implementations, are subject to Microsoft's DRM-OS patent. Absent a patent license from Microsoft, any individual developer, open source software development effort, and indeed any potential competitor of Microsoft that wishes to create a Palladium-like TOR would do so in violation of Microsoft's patent. U.S. Patent law takes a dim view of such illegal infringers: willful infringers, in particular infringers that generate a profit from their creation of a non-Microsoft version of a TOR face the risk of a court ordering such infringers to pay treble damages. Palladium team representatives have indicated that Microsoft, or at least the Palladium team, believes that Microsoft may license their patented technology to competing efforts at some undecided time in the future under terms that have yet to be contemplated, have so far not been discussed with Microsoft's legal staff, and may or may not involve remuneration. As of this moment, Microsoft has not provided the open source community with a world-wide, royalty-free, irrevocable patent license to the totality of Microsoft's patents utilized in Palladium's TOR. Since open source efforts therefore remain legally prohibited from creating non-Microsoft TORs, AARG!'s lauding of synergies between Palladium and open source software development appears premature. > [1] A message from Microsoft's Peter Biddle on 5 Aug 2002; > unfortunately the cryptography archive is missing this day's > messages. "The memory isn't encrypted, nor are the apps nor > the TOR when they are on the hard drive. Encrypting the apps > wouldn't make them more secure, so they aren't encrypted." > See also > http://www.mail-archive.com/cryptography@wasabisystems.com/msg > 02554.html, > Lucky Green's description of Microsoft's lack of plans to use Pd for copy protection. In the interest of clarity, it probably should be mentioned that any claims Microsoft may make stating that Microsoft will not encrypt their software or software components when used with Palladium of course only applies to Microsoft and not to the countless other software vendors creating applications for the Windows platform. Lastly, since I have seen this error in a number of articles, it seems worth mentioning that Microsoft stated explicitly that increasing the security of DRM schemes protecting digital entertainment content, but not executable code, formed the impetus to the Palladium effort. --Lucky Green --------------------------------------------------------------------- The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]