more on FROM Intel REPLY Intel quietly embeds DRM in it's 945 chips firmware

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: "Whiteside, Donald M" <donald.m.whiteside () intel com>
Date: May 30, 2005 7:51:14 PM EDT
To: dave () farber net
Subject: RE: [IP] Intel quietly embeds DRM in it's 945 chips firmware


The article grossly misrepresents the discussion that occurred.  The
rights management technology referred to in the article was not a secret
DRM from Intel, but the DTCP-IP technology publicly offered by the 5C
Entity; which Intel is a Founder.  Intel believes that the DTCP-IP
technology is an important element in enabling protected transport of
compressed content within the home network, and we continue to promote
DTCP-IP for this application which enables greater consumer flexibility
& use of premium entertainment content.

Don Whiteside
VP Technical Policy & Standards
Intel Corporation



Begin forwarded message:

From: David Wagner <daw () cs berkeley edu>
Date: May 30, 2005 3:58:52 PM EDT
To: dave () farber net
Subject: [IP] Intel quietly embeds DRM in it's 945 chips firmware


Intel is refusing to say how their DRM scheme will work?  This is a
remarkably ignorant stance, one which could get them in trouble.

The article says:
   ``[Intel's Australian technical manager] Tucker ducked questions
   regarding technical details of how embedded DRM would work saying it
   was not in the interests of his company to spell out how the
technology
   in the interests of security.''
     http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,121027,00.asp

So, which was it?  "Not in the interests of his company", or not "in
the interests of security"?  Either way, it is a bad sign.

If Intel is refusing to disclose how their DRM works because that
would not be "in the interests of [the] company", that's troubling.
That's going to leave the impression of a company which has embedded
a Trojan horse feature that they know will be unpopular among many of
their customers, a feature that is being hushed up by marketing folks to
avoid criticism.  If so, Intel had better to expect continued calls to
"come clean" on this one.

Alternatively, if Intel's representative is refusing to disclose how
their DRM works "in the interests of security", that reflects serious
ignorance of the field of computer security.  Anyone with experience
in this area knows that 'security through obscurity' rarely works.
If Intel's engineers really believe in some kind of 'security through
obscurity' hocus-pocus, then they haven't studied history, and I
wouldn't
hold out too much hope for their technology to remain secure.

I would have thought Intel would know better, given their past
experience
with the Intel ID.  It's a shame to see the subject of "trusted
computing"
be approached this with, because I believe that the technology might
find some takers if only it were approached with sufficient openness.
I hope Intel will take the opportunity to clarify their position in the
near future.





EEkid () aol com writes:


> Intel quietly embeds DRM in it's 945 chips firmware
> http://www.cdfreaks.com/news/11878
>
> [...] Intel is now embedding digital rights management in the new
> dual-core processor Pentium D and the 945 chipset [...]
>
> However, Tucker ducked questions regarding technical details of how
> embedded DRM would work saying it was not in the interests of his
> company to spell out how the technology in the interests of
> security. [...]


-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as donald.m.whiteside () intel com
To manage your subscription, go to
  http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at:
http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/


-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as lists-ip () insecure org
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/