Re: CDR: Re: Seth on TCPA at Defcon/Usenix
On Mon, 12 Aug 2002, AARG! Anonymous wrote: His analysis actually applies to a wide range of security features, such as the examples given earlier: secure games, improved P2P, distributed computing as Adam Back suggested, DRM of course, etc.. TCPA is a potentially very powerful security enhancement, so it does make sense that it can strengthen all of these things, and DRLs as well. But I don't see that it is fair to therefore link TCPA specifically with DRLs, when there are any number of other security capabilities that are also strengthened by TCPA. Sorry, but now you're just trolling. Acid is great for removing all manner of skin problems. It also happens to cause death, but linking fatalities to it is unfair, considering that's not what acid was _intended_ to do. Creating cheat-proof gaming at the cost of allowing document revoking enabled software sounds like a bad idea. -j
Re: CDR: Re: Seth on TCPA at Defcon/Usenix
On Mon, 12 Aug 2002, AARG! Anonymous wrote: His analysis actually applies to a wide range of security features, such as the examples given earlier: secure games, improved P2P, distributed computing as Adam Back suggested, DRM of course, etc.. TCPA is a potentially very powerful security enhancement, so it does make sense that it can strengthen all of these things, and DRLs as well. But I don't see that it is fair to therefore link TCPA specifically with DRLs, when there are any number of other security capabilities that are also strengthened by TCPA. Sorry, but now you're just trolling. Acid is great for removing all manner of skin problems. It also happens to cause death, but linking fatalities to it is unfair, considering that's not what acid was _intended_ to do. Creating cheat-proof gaming at the cost of allowing document revoking enabled software sounds like a bad idea. -j
