On Sat, 2005-11-05 at 20:09 +0000, Brian Brunswick wrote: > On 05/11/05, Jonathan S. Shapiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Sat, 2005-11-05 at 20:25 +0100, Alfred M. Szmidt wrote: > > > The hardware can refuse to run anything that hasn't been authorised by > > > the manufcuter of treacherous computing hardware. > > > > This is an issue that I have actually tracked very closely. > > > > To my knowledge, there is no such feature in any currently proposed or > > implemented TC hardware. Can you please identify a specification that > > supports your assertion? > > > > XBox, Playstation...?
Good. I had forgotten those. But we are discussing general-purpose devices here, and I should have constrained my question to the TPM and TC proposals that are being proposed for computers. And honestly, I don't see a problem with XBox or Playstation. It's the user's right to buy a crippled device. If we want to argue that Hurd should not be ported to a system that precludes installation of some other operating system, I have no objection to this. However, this would not preclude running on systems that implement either the TPM or the TCPA chips. shap _______________________________________________ L4-hurd mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/l4-hurd
