Before or after Palladium SP5?
Microsoft, Intel, the RIAA and the MPAA and others would like for us to believe that implementation of the Palladium initiative is in our best interests. But when has any of them ever had the user's best interests in mind?
When Microsoft was selling the same swiss-cheese-security version of NT 4.0 on the last CDs it shipped as it did on the first CDs they shipped? And then did the same thing with W2K?
When Intel sold the world Pentium processors that couldn't correctly tell you that 2+2 = 4?
When Sony distributed 11 million audio CDs in Europe, the copy protection on which will lock up Mac OS? (Well, that one is less of a deal -- you can bypass the protection with a felt-tipped marker.)
When Microsoft screwed with Win32 in XP so badly that a lot of third-party software wouldn't work on it?
When Microsoft instituted their latest licensing scheme?
Don't believe the marketing hype, boys and girls. Palladium exists to protect their interests, not yours. Microsoft doesn't like pirates undercutting their software prices. Palladium is there to put a stop to that. The RIAA doesn't like people ripping CDs, even for their own use. Palladium can put a stop to ripping, too.
And the so-called "fritz" chip (
the core of the system, is just asking to be abused. One good distributed denial of service attack can take down the functionality not only of the server that is the target of the attack, but of all the applications that require security tokens from that server, too.
And God help us when the virus writers figure out how to hack "fritz". ______________________________________________________________________
Never forget that we are
made of the stuff of stars