Talk:Trusted Computing/Archive 2

message: I'm editing the part that references Trustworthy Computing. Trusted Computing is not the same as Trustworthy Computing. The first is (quoting the article) a "family of specifications from the TCPA, which extend the behavior of a personal computer or server to offer particular cryptographic security services", while the latter is a Microsoft marketing campaign that was a response to the security problems within windows. Microsoft is involved with Trusted Computing, but they don't call it Trustworthy Computing. Though Microsofts "Trustworthy Computing" is mostly marketing hype, from an inside perspective, it's more oriented towards eliminating buffer overflows, ensuring privacy of data, etc. I'm also editing the Trustworthy Computing article that forwards here and changing it into a stub, since they aren't the same thing, unless anyone objects.
Timbatron 06:20, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Trustworthy Computing

message: I'd put this in myself but I don't know the answer. If consumers are to bring market pressure against (or for) this technology, we need a way to know what we are buying. -unsigned
The answer is as simple as self interest. If you can trust it, they can't and vice versa. Like what's a "good" wage for the worker versus what's a "good" return on investment. "Trusted Computing" is  ALL  about WHO can trust the computer to OBEY them. This is the consumers's first product with a mind. And that mind can be programmed to obey it's creators rather than it's "owner". WAS 4.250 06:38, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Suppose I go to the store to buy a computer. There is not a green one with a sticker that says "this computer cannot spy on you" and a red one that says "contains trusted computing technology". So the article could be improved by a discussion of how the consumer can tell when they are buying a so-called "trusted computer". Does anyone know the answer? Care to share? Chauncey27 19:09, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  How to tell if a computer is "trusted" 

message: I love this neglected little article. The recently added anonymity section had these problems:
*"As new identification technologies such as biometrics and RFID become widespread, it is expected that computer users will be identified with still greater certainty, and that ever increasing amounts of information will be available about them." It is expected by whom?
*"proponents of TC believe" / "Critics point out" - Great subtle POV. Proponents of TC are obviously acting on blind faith, but critics (with their lab coats and objective facts) "point out" how the proponents are wrong.
Rhobite 00:08, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anonymity section 

message: I'm just trying to make sense of what FT2 is trying to get at with the new lead.  As I say, it's very hard to read.
Consensus version                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     	FT2 version                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 	Notes
Trusted computing (TC) refers to technology from the Trusted Computing Group (TCG) which is claimed to allow computers and servers to offer improved computer security and protection from computer viruses and the like.                                                                                                                                             	Trusted computing (TC) refers to technology from the Trusted Computing Group (TCG) which is claimed to allow computers and servers to offer improved computer security and protection from computer viruses and the like.                                                                                                                                                                                                                   	
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      	It is a controversial term signifying broadly that the computer is designed to trust less, and potentially to enforce and require features such as digital rights management in order to be used. A trusted computer is one that a user is forced to trust more, due to lack of choice, rather than because it is "trustworthy". This is a security definition of the term, in contrast to the lay-understanding of the meaning of the word.	(1) The term is not controversial (possibly mildly misleading), the technology is.  (2) The rambling criticisms belong (better written) in the main body.  (3) the "lay understanding" thing is too argumentative, we don't presume misunderstanding, just describe.  I think we can keep the word controversial to pertain to the technology (not term). Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters
However, many computer security experts disapprove of trusted computing, because it allows computer manufacturers and software authors to monitor and control what users may do with their computers. Microsoft calls TC trustworthy computing, and  Intel has started calling it safer computing, but Richard Stallman and some others call it treacherous computing.	For this and related reasons, many computer security experts disapprove of trusted computing, because it allows computer manufacturers and software authors increased control to monitor and dictate what users may do with their computers. Microsoft calls TC trustworthy computing, and  Intel has started calling it safer computing, but Richard Stallman and some others call it treacherous computing.                               	
For policy purposes, trusted computing is an implementation of a trusted system.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      	For policy purposes, trusted computing is a form of implementation of a trusted system, ie a system that trusts software and external users less, and therefore is more strict about enforcing or denying different activities, and therefore in theory can itself be trusted more.                                                                                                                                                         	Inappropriate to include digression explaining "trusted system" (main body has more, as does linked article).  This is the intro and brevity matters. Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters
Fair points. Answers and comments:
# Clearly the term is controversial as well as the technology. "Microsoft refers to TC as trustworthy computing ... Richard Stallman and some other critics suggest the backronym treacherous computing", clear evidence of a controversy over the wording independent of and additional to controversies over the technology. 
# Could you clarify what exactly you mean by the "criticisms" which you feel I've added to the 2nd para? I added the information that TC signifies that the computer is designed to trust less, and potentially to enforce and require features such as digital rights management in order to be used. A trusted computer is one that a user is forced to trust more, due to lack of choice, rather than because it is trustworthy.. It's not clear to me how this is a "criticism". These seem pretty common agreed facts and definitions from both sides. It is also the heart of the reason why a controversy over TC exists at all.
# The comment that "the 'lay understanding' thing is too argumentative, we don't presume misunderstanding" seems extremely odd in light of the fact the article goes immediately on itself to say "Trust means something different to security experts than the meaning laypersons often assign".
#:Not immediately. The main article has a different role than the lead.
# The problem is that the intro to the "trusted computing" article now doesn't actually say what trusted computing is. I find that very odd. It says merely, what it is claimed to achieve and that some people feel it gives over too much control and call it names. For an article intro, thats inadequate. The intro to "trusted computing" has to say what the actual meaning of trusted computing is.
If you find my wording unduely complex, take what's useful from it and write your own, but a short summary of what TC actually means and what it is, belongs in the article intro somehow. For that purpose a 1 sentence explanation of a trusted system, a little more than just "TC is an instance of a TS", is appropriate. That's all I'm trying to achieve. I haven't reverted since I am looking for comments and discussion though.
Clarification question on one aspect of TC: Would it be fair to characterize the critics' stance and backronym as indicating they feel the term "trusted" is a deceptive (or at best misleading) euphemism?
FT2 06:53, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I think readers can figure out that "treacherous" isn't meant as complimentary. Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 07:39, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comparing versions 

message: Richard Stallman says:
"The technical idea underlying treacherous computing is that the computer includes a digital encryption and signature device, and the keys are kept secret from you. Proprietary programs will use this device to control which other programs you can run, which documents or data you can access, and what programs you can pass them to. These programs will continually download new authorization rules through the Internet, and impose those rules automatically on your work. If you don't allow your computer to obtain the new rules periodically from the Internet, some capabilities will automatically cease to function. Programs that use treacherous computing will continually download new authorization rules through the Internet, and impose those rules automatically on your work. If Microsoft, or the US government, does not like what you said in a document you wrote, they could post new instructions telling all computers to refuse to let anyone read that document. Each computer would obey when it downloads the new instructions. Your writing would be subject to 1984-style retroactive erasure. You might be unable to read it yourself. Treacherous computing puts the existence of free operating systems and free applications at risk, because you may not be able to run them at all. Some versions of treacherous computing would require the operating system to be specifically authorized by a particular company. Free operating systems could not be installed. Some versions of treacherous computing would require every program to be specifically authorized by the operating system developer. You could not run free applications on such a system. If you did figure out how, and told someone, that could be a crime." WAS 4.250 22:11, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Richard Stallment says