From: "Geo" 

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_007C_01C5CD1B.557095E0
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

None of those are a mandatory part of the boot process.

Geo.
  "Rich"  wrote in message news:4349439c{at}w3.nls.net...
     No more or less than passwords, TLS/SSL, smart cards, tokens, or =
anything else someone wants to make a mandatory part of any process they = choose.

  Rich

    "Geo"  wrote in message =
news:434921c2$1{at}w3.nls.net...
    But the feature being discussed can not only "be used" for DRM, it =
can be used to FORCE DRM on those who don't want it and to prevent =
competition on the OS market by not allowing an OS that doesn't force = drm
to be used.

    Geo.
      "Rich"  wrote in message news:434839da$1{at}w3.nls.net...
         My objection to your use of the term DRM is that it doesn't =
apply and diverts the discussion away to off topic, often silly, =
emotionally charged claims.  A claim that something could be used for = DRM
could apply to anything as there is no limit to what someone might = use. 
Passwords can be used for DRM.  They are today.  TLS/SSL can be = used for
DRM.  It is today. Smartcards, tokens, or anything to identify = the entity
to which rights were granted can be used.

         None of this helps for secure boot whose purpose is to validate =
the software environment and has no need to identify the user or the = machine.

      Rich

        "John Beckett"
 wrote in =
message news:7roek156s13jun0lt9u808ahvmc20pbmrj{at}4ax.com...
        "Rich"  wrote in message news::
        >    Your reply falls apart immediately after "as you well =
know".
        >  In fact you have it exactly backwards.

        Maybe you're answering in automatic mode??

        Just because I mentioned the terms "Geo" and
"DRM" in the same =
message
        does not mean I am supporting all or any of Geo's assertions re =
DRM.

        In fact, I was pointing out that trusted computing is capable of =
good
        things, and I predict that with the rising sophistication of =
malware,
        companies really will need trusted computing systems for their =
laptops if
        the laptops are allowed to connect to the normal company =
network.

        I claim that the same features of trusted computing that provide =
the
        benefit of secure remote access are also capable of providing =
DRM. I am
        not commenting on whether that is good or bad.

        I would appreciate a clear correction if I have made a mistake =
in the
        above (i.e. which words are wrong, and briefly why).

        > What you approve is up to you and if you use it can provide =
you with
        > a degree of trust not available without secure boot.

        I understand that.
        =20
        > Many of george's opinions on DRM are ...

        That's an issue for another thread, IMHO.

        John

------=_NextPart_000_007C_01C5CD1B.557095E0
Content-Type: text/html;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable








None of those are a mandatory part of =
the boot=20
process.
 
Geo.

  "Rich" <{at}> wrote in message news:4349439c{at}w3.nls.net...
     No more
or less than =
passwords,=20
  TLS/SSL, smart cards, tokens, or anything else someone wants to make a =

  mandatory part of any process they choose.
   
  Rich
   
  

    "Geo" <georger{at}nls.net>=20">mailto:georger{at}nls.net">georger{at}nls.net>=20
    wrote in message news:434921c2$1{at}w3.nls.net...
    But the feature being
discussed can =
not only=20
    "be used" for DRM, it can be used to FORCE DRM on those who don't =
want it=20
    and to prevent competition on the OS market by not allowing an OS =
that=20
    doesn't force drm to be used.
     
    Geo.
    

      "Rich" <{at}> wrote in message news:434839da$1{at}w3.nls.net...
         My
objection to your =
use of the=20
      term DRM is that it doesn't apply and diverts the discussion away =
to off=20
      topic, often silly, emotionally charged claims.  A claim that =

      something could be used for DRM could apply to anything as there =
is no=20
      limit to what someone might use.  Passwords can be used for=20
      DRM.  They are today.  TLS/SSL can be used for =
DRM.  It is=20
      today. Smartcards, tokens, or anything to identify the entity to =
which=20
      rights were granted can be used.
       
        
None of this helps =
for secure=20
      boot whose purpose is to validate the software =
environment and=20
      has no need to identify the user or the machine.
       
      Rich
       
      
        "John Beckett" <FirstnameSurname{at}com=">mailto:FirstnameSurname{at}compuserve.com.omit">FirstnameSurname{at}com=
puserve.com.omit>=20
        wrote in message news:7roek156s13=
jun0lt9u808ahvmc20pbmrj{at}4ax.com..."Rich"=20
        <{at}> wrote in message >   =20
        Your reply falls apart immediately after "as you well=20
        know".>  In fact you have it exactly =
backwards.Maybe=20
        you're answering in automatic mode??Just because I =
mentioned the=20
        terms "Geo" and "DRM" in the same
messagedoes not mean I am=20
        supporting all or any of Geo's assertions re DRM.In =
fact, I was=20
        pointing out that trusted computing is capable of =
goodthings, and I=20
        predict that with the rising sophistication of =
malware,companies=20
        really will need trusted computing systems for their laptops =
ifthe=20
        laptops are allowed to connect to the normal company =
network.I=20
        claim that the same features of trusted computing that provide=20
        thebenefit of secure remote access are also capable of =
providing=20
        DRM. I amnot commenting on whether that is good or =
bad.I=20
        would appreciate a clear correction if I have made a mistake in=20
        theabove (i.e. which words are wrong, and briefly =
why).>=20
        What you approve is up to you and if you use it can provide you=20
        with> a degree of trust not available without secure=20
        boot.I understand
that. > Many of =
george's=20
        opinions on DRM are ...That's an issue for another =
thread,=20
        =
IMHO.John=


------=_NextPart_000_007C_01C5CD1B.557095E0--

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5