[DMCA-Activists] Weinberger: The Palladium Paradox

[Seth Johnson]

> http://www.technologyreview.com/articles/wo_weinberger102502.asp?p=0

The Palladium Paradox

By David Weinberger   
October 25, 2002

Why we have everything to fear about the next operating
system out of Redmond.

When Microsoft announced its entry into the “trusted
computing” arena in June, the requisite witticism within the
IT industry was that putting “Microsoft” next to “trusted”
is an oxymoron. Four months later, many smirks have
disappeared as the plans progress and the true significance
of code-name Palladium becomes ever more clear. 

The software, which is slated for future versions of the
Windows operating system, looks on paper to be an all-good
system for increasing privacy and security. The consequences
of its deployment in the real world, however, will likely be
decreased user control over the contents of their computers
and a serious increase in Microsoft’s stranglehold on
desktops. 

Palladium is a big deal. It will require a major
re-jiggering of how computers are built and run, with
changes to hardware, software and even the data itself.
First, it establishes a secure computing space, which means
that as a computer starts up, the software will verify that
the hardware components such as hard drives can't be read by
unauthenticated programs under any known circumstances.
Palladium will also check the computer’s central processing
unit’s serial number before kicking into operation; both
Intel and AMD have already said they're willing to include
such identification. Before any program is run, Palladium
will make sure it's authenticated via a digital certificate.
Stored data will be encrypted and will only be decrypted by
authenticated programs. Apparently, however, it will not
require a new mousepad.

Although Microsoft touts Palladium as a way to keep
computers virus free and to give users control over what
information they give out, critics were quick to notice that
it just so happens to be an ideal platform for the
management of digital content—MP3s, ebooks, digital movies,
etc.—after it's been downloaded onto someone's computer. As
Peter Biddle, the Palladium Product Unit Manager, explained
to me last week, Palladium isn't a digital rights
management  (DRM) platform in the traditional sense; it
does, however, enable DRM systems to govern content after it
has entered a client computer. But Palladium isn't really an
enabler. After all, users can already agree to a variety of
rules governing what they can do with digital content. For
example, I can buy an MP3 and agree not to copy it. No one
needs Palladium to enter into such agreements. Palladium
isn’t an enabler. It’s an enforcer.

One potential upside of Palladium may be that it will remove
fears that currently keep content producers—oh, heck, let's
just get it over and call them "Hollywood"—from opening up
the digital floodgates and distributing their wares
digitally. No longer will they have to worry that the MP3 I
download will find its way out of my Palladium-enhanced PC
vault and into the post-Napster file-sharing black market
using an “unauthorized” program like Kazaa. Hollywood will
still have to worry about other ways digital content will
wriggle free, but the leakage from legal,
digitally-transmitted content will be patched.  (Biddle
surprised me by saying that Palladium-protected sound files
will be played through the normal media players, making the
sound stream susceptible to capture; videos however will be
playable only with a secure Palladium player.) Of course,
there are always Macs or Linux operating systems, right? 
After all, Microsoft so far has not said whether Palladium
will only be for Windows. But here's where it gets really
scary. If Hollywood sees 100 million machines running
Palladium that can't copy the files they sell (excuse me,
license), they will be sorely tempted to release digital
content in formats only Palladium can unlock. Palladium
becomes the preferred player for digital content. The
dreaded unholy alliance between Microsoft and Hollywood
becomes real. 

Paranoia? Sure, but consider the following. Microsoft is
avidly pursuing the merger of television and PCs, making the
download of digital content not just something for lonely
geeks. Second, how else can the overkill security features
of Palladium be explained? Computers can be kept virus free
without locking down hardware. Precious few viruses spread
by people sneaking into houses and injecting bugs directly
onto hard drives. Finally, Microsoft has not done the simple
and obvious thing to do to convince the user community that
Palladium isn't all about becoming Hollywood's best pal:
Make Palladium multi-platform so that you don’t have to use
Windows if you want to view the latest Bruce Willis
blockbuster on your computer or TV-computer combo.

Trusted computing from a convicted monopolist that would
lock up mainstream content? Even if Microsoft had any
credibility as a provider of secure systems (it doesn't),
Palladium should worry us.


David Weinberger (address@hidden) is a co-author of The
Cluetrain Manifesto and editor of The Journal of the
Hyperlinked Organization. His latest book is Small Pieces
Loosely Joined.