[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: A _good_ and valid use for TPM
From: |
Robert Millan |
Subject: |
Re: A _good_ and valid use for TPM |
Date: |
Fri, 27 Feb 2009 21:03:14 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) |
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 03:21:21AM +0200, Alex Besogonov wrote:
> Robert Millan wrote:
>>> Making sure, that noone can override it, can be awfully difficult,
>>> especially
>>> under a physical attacker. A hardware that is at least a bit designed to
>>> withstand such an attack can help a lot.
>> I'm not sure why is physical security so awfully difficult for you (can't you
>> use locks, tamper-proof seals, cameras and alarms?), but most people who're
>> in
>> the bussiness of protecting physical goods manage to sort it out.
> My devices will be installed at clients' locations. It's impossible to
> guarantee that all devices will be physically secure.
>
> If you live in the USA then one day such device might contain your
> private data. Would you like it to be stolen?
My private data is safely stored. The stuff Google reads from my Gmail
account is *not* private data.
If you send your private stuff elsewhere and trust noone can read it because
a small chip that's not even under your control told you so, you're being
naive...
> Reverse engineering the TPM chip is very costly. And I'm not going to
> try to protect data from NSA or CIA or another three-letter agency.
...but thankfully, not as much as I thought.
--
Robert Millan
The DRM opt-in fallacy: "Your data belongs to us. We will decide when (and
how) you may access your data; but nobody's threatening your freedom: we
still allow you to remove your data and not access it at all."
- Re: A _good_ and valid use for TPM, (continued)
- Re: A _good_ and valid use for TPM, Robert Millan, 2009/02/21
- Re: A _good_ and valid use for TPM, Jan Alsenz, 2009/02/21
- Re: A _good_ and valid use for TPM, Robert Millan, 2009/02/21
- Re: A _good_ and valid use for TPM, Alex Besogonov, 2009/02/21
- Re: A _good_ and valid use for TPM, phcoder, 2009/02/22
- Re: A _good_ and valid use for TPM, Michal Suchanek, 2009/02/22
- Re: A _good_ and valid use for TPM, phcoder, 2009/02/22
- Re: A _good_ and valid use for TPM, step21, 2009/02/22
- Re: A _good_ and valid use for TPM, Michal Suchanek, 2009/02/23
- Re: A _good_ and valid use for TPM, Robert Millan, 2009/02/27
- Re: A _good_ and valid use for TPM,
Robert Millan <=
- Re: A _good_ and valid use for TPM, Alex Besogonov, 2009/02/21
- Re: A _good_ and valid use for TPM, phcoder, 2009/02/21
- Re: A _good_ and valid use for TPM, Robert Millan, 2009/02/21
- Re: A _good_ and valid use for TPM, Robert Millan, 2009/02/21
- Re: A _good_ and valid use for TPM, Alex Besogonov, 2009/02/21
- Re: A _good_ and valid use for TPM, Robert Millan, 2009/02/27
- Re: A _good_ and valid use for TPM, Michael Gorven, 2009/02/20
- Re: A _good_ and valid use for TPM, phcoder, 2009/02/20
- Re: A _good_ and valid use for TPM, Michael Gorven, 2009/02/20
- Re: A _good_ and valid use for TPM, Jan Alsenz, 2009/02/20