Cryptographers Find Fault With Palladium 345
FrzrBrn writes "Whitfield Diffie and Ronald Rivest raised concerns about Microsoft's Next-Generation Secure Computing Base (formerly Palladium) at the RSA Conference in San Francisco on Monday. They are (naturally) concerned about vendor lock-in and having computers turned against their owners. See the story at EE Times."
Better they find fault with it now, (Score:5, Interesting)
And now we're supposed to trust 'Trusted Computing'?
Privacy (Score:5, Interesting)
They're cautious for a good reason. Making every PC an Xbox with push content delivery just opens up an ugly vulnerability in your system. I can't wait for the distributed Palladium cracking project!
From accounts of Microsofts other presentations they are there primarily to advertise the future of their technology rather than to actually discuss the future of security with others.
Excellent wording... (Score:2, Interesting)
This will give the whole "man over machine" persona to Palladium, thus making it unpopular.
w00t!
I hope they're right (Score:5, Interesting)
Paladium is "Optional" (for varying definitions..) (Score:5, Interesting)
In Microsoft's NGSCB approach, users would have to consciously evoke a secure operating mode that would be turned off by default.
Now as we all can imagine, it won't take long before various applications will not work unless Paladium's controls are in effect. Anything that accesses potentially copyrighted works are the most likely to begin with. Windows Media player, E-Books, and later Office products will be the first to require this.
Microsoft is already pushing to get their media formats to be the default. Websites are frequently given discounted access to Windows Media creation software. Colleges and other low-budget places are frequently targets. They have to agree to use only those formats, not quicktime or MPEG, in return. This forces users to get Windows Media player to watch this content. Later MS will require these sites start saving in the newer, Paladium-only, versions, and we'll have our transition to lockout today.
What can you do to prevent this? Stay with open formats. Ogg-Vorbis. MPEG. XML/OpenOffice.org.
It'll be very interesting to see if this subtle push backfires or succeeds. Ten years ago, there's no doubt Microsoft would have been able to back us into any corner they wanted. But the last few has shown some strong distrust - people no longer take MS's word as law.
Let's hope that trend continues.
Unfortunately... (Score:5, Interesting)
Seriously though, read the following:
"The right way to look at this is you are putting a virtual set-top box inside your PC. You are essentially renting out part of your PC to people you may not trust..."
Aren't people who download Kazaa already doing that, since Brilliant Digital's spyware is installed with the program and can use the computer's CPU cycles and hard drive space without warning? It seems that unless there is a big enough hoopla made about Palladium, unsuspecting customers will have no idea of "Trusted Computing"'s true effects and limitations on usage. Just ask a non computer geek Kazaa user if they're concerned that Brilliant Digital has so much control over their computer, and if they give you a response other than a blank stare accompanied with a "wha?" I'll give you a Gummy bear (It's warm from being in my pocket).
Re:In Other News... (Score:2, Interesting)
It's called "Boiling the frog" (Score:2, Interesting)
Laws of Robotics? (Score:5, Interesting)
1. Is palladium optional for the SO? Could Linux or Winshit98 be installed on a Palladium box w/ no ill effects?
2. Is palladium optional for developers? Can "Joe Shareware" still release his software w/out paying an evil corporation for the right to sell it?
3. Is there any way whatsoever in which this would help Joe User or Joe Hacker(not to be confused with Joe Cracker)?
4. Will this be integrated on Sparc and PowerPC or just PCs? Is AMD accepting this BS or just Intel?
5. Who will be in charge of licensing keys for palladium software?
Re:Questions: (Score:3, Interesting)
If MS has it's way with palladium, it will be just like the XBox now where you must pay MS for the boot key for a game to work. I dare say that not only was the XBox an attempt to get into the console market, but also a testing ground for palladium. Given the dismal failure of the XBox so far, this could also explain the truckloads of cash that MS has been burning on the XBox. They WANT Palladium to work and will do anything to make sure it DOES work. It is their final chance to secure complete market domination inside the law before linux makes it's way onto mainstream desktops.
All I can suggest with this sorry state of affairs is to change your hardware now to an etirely different platform. (gamer's won't like this) Move away from x86. There are many architecture's out there that would both benefit from incresed use and R&D funding. Names such as Alpha, SPARC, and my personal favourite, PowerPC are all perfectly good systems, and as we all know, run linux and BSD. So, choose your processor, choose your OS, GET SOME APPS COMPILED FOR THEM! and make a stand to let MS know that you own your systems and that all your boxen are NOT belong to them. Stop talking about it and do something for a change. I have I run a MS-free iBook with OSX and X11 and have never been happier
Does microsoft arrogance know any bounds? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:It's about who "owns" your ID (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Privacy (Score:3, Interesting)
Forget about it. The XBox key is 2048 bit RSA key. You can expect that to be the minimum key length Paladium will use. Last I heard 512 bit RSA keys could be brute forced, but 2048 bit keys are far too difficult to even attempt. I'm sure people will try (as they foolishly have with the X-Box), but it's highly unlikely it'll be broken in any amount of time where the key would still be useable. Think about it for just a minute. Do you really think MS is dumb enough to chose a key length that has any chance of being broken anytime soon?
Trust (Score:2, Interesting)
"I'll pretend to trust you if you'll pretend to trust me."
How eerily accurate.
Platform shift (Score:5, Interesting)
Going to a DRM OS will change how personal computers work. People aren't always happy with change, and if forced to, they will review their options. That would be the perfect time for a Linux distro that does a painless install/conversion for Windows users, and installs a "best of breed" set of packages that are either compatable or equivilent to MS Office and friends. (If you really want 101+ different editors, make it an option.)
With the right package at the right time, the MS DRM "trusted" OS could be Microsoft's PS/2.
Re:Cryptographers Find Fault With Palladium (Score:5, Interesting)
Damn good point. Your comment gathers up and bundles rather nicely the hard cold facts. And of course, once MS has made this REQUIRED to use any software of any consequence, I am sure the price of Windows will jump again.
THIS is EXACTLY why I am working very hard to learn Linux on the Desktop and hone my *nix server skills as well. It isn't a matter of 'bad old MS' to me as much as it appears that they are on the verge of imploding, and they don't realize it. Its a simple matter that I think Linux will end up overtaking MS not on merit, but by simply having less DEmerits at the same time it becomes 'as good enough as'. When the change happens, I want to be up to speed, and ready to capitalize on it. (read: make $)
Free people don't like this kinda shit, it sounds so, well, unfree (as in speech). As the computer gets cheaper, windows gets more expensive, Linux gets better (RH9 is about as good as win95 to me, which is a compliment) it WILL put pressure on windows. Unlike others, I do NOT think that Linux will gain a percent of market share here and there. I think that it will happen in a very short period, BANG, and over 2 years, half of everyone is no longer using MS. History shows this is the most common method for change.
This is why I am not a MS basher (Really, I use Windows). I don't have to be, they are becoming their own worst enemy, and beginning in 2 or 3 years, they are going to be very shocked in a very short period of time.
Had enough of DMCA, DRM and "Trusted Computing" (Score:2, Interesting)
Comment removed (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Not A Crypto Fault (Score:4, Interesting)
That depends on what the meaning of the word "secure" is. Or to which party (i.e., user, vendor, etc.) the word "secure" applies.
With Palladium, I won't be able to inspect the memory or other operational aspects of any program that is running in the "nexus," and which doesn't give me permission to do so. Supposing some kind of virus or, more likely, spyware starts running in the nexus layer, I have no way (short of pulling the power plug) of preventing it from running. That doesn't sound like the kind of "security" I'm interested in.
the killer app (Score:3, Interesting)
For example company big$co wants to sell data file D to john doe. big$co gives a copy of D encrypted with the secret key on john doe's Palladium enabled comp to john. (notice i dont say John Doe's key as this is not the case. thats exactly what Rivest and Diffie are, rightly IMHO, complaining about.) The secret key in the box can only be accessed through the trusted OS (nexus) which in turn makes sure that only trusted software (i.e. some app provided (and sold) by big$co). Since the pladium part of the system will only boot if the nexus is trusted (i.e. hasnt been tampered with, and thus hashes to a predefined and stored value) and the nexus checks that only trusted software talks to it, the enviornment is controled by big$co and Redmond.
The reason i say this is how they are targeting the end user is because they are trying to create an environment which is favorable to content providers such as big$co. Thus there should then be more such companies, more offers, and more content. This in turn should provide some kind of killer ap (should as far as Microsoft is concerned ofcourse). And thus the end user now HAS to get a palladium comp, if they want all the content.
one problem with this setup which is partly what rivest and deffie were argueing, is that if john doesnt own his key, what if say he buys a new computer or his old one just plain breaks for example. all his payed for content becomes worthless. this is ofcourse mearly one example of what is so grossly wrong with all of this, never mind the moral issues that u dont own ur computer anymore.
uh huh... right. (Score:1, Interesting)
There is ALWAYS a way. Proven over and over by the crackers out there.
Re:It's called "Boiling the frog" (Score:3, Interesting)
Here's a somewhat odd quote from the article. (Score:3, Interesting)
Correct me if I'm wrong, but hasn't *nix been doing this for oh say 30 years?
Re:Privacy (Score:3, Interesting)
Yet another European/Asian/Other citizen bashing the US.
Look, the system over here works the way it does. One of the problems with the system is that corporations have been given too much political control.
Many European countries are already enacting their own versions of the DMCA and other rediculous laws. Europeans, don't think you're immunne.
"India... largest economic superpower on Earth"
Wrong. China will likely be the largest economic superpower on the planet.
"Once again, it makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside to know deep in my heart that no matter how you look at it, I don't live or work in the USA
It will make you feel sad and afraid when you realize that what happens in the US will eventually happen elsewhere. We were ignorent while they passed the DMCA. People of other countries are now laughing at the US while their own versions of the DMCA are beeing silently made into law.
Countries are largely becoming irrelivent. Multinational corporations cross the former country lines. The world economy has become increasingly linked over the past fifty years.
The US is at the top of the food chain right now. It may not be forever. To be honest, it really doesn't matter. It should be the responsibility of every person to fight repressive laws. If you ignore your own government, only bad can come from it.
"the rest of the world isn't drowning itself in stupid laws quite like the USA is at the moment"
You said it best yourself... "at the moment". Just because it hasn't happened doesn't mean that it won't happen. There needs to be world opposition to the repressive laws.
Insulting the US is like insulting China. I hate the Chinese government and many of the things that it stands for. I do not hate China. Instead of attacking the "US", you should attack the bad laws, lobbying, and polititians who created those laws.
" I don't live or work in the USA
Oh, where do you live? China? India? Africa?
You can do a lot worse than the US. This is the country where even the "poor" have TVs and food. Well, at least most of them. There are a lot of problems here - crime is one of them, corruption in politics is another.
But none of the policies that the US has put forward have truly surpressed invnovation or free speech.
The PATRIOT act has a lot of nasty things it it, but it is not so different from laws in Europe or other countries.
Patent stupidity is another issue - but this has more to do with incompetence than with poor laws.
Laugh, smile, whatever. We'll see the expression on your face when they come for you.
Re:Privacy (Score:5, Interesting)
Actually one of the best attacks on Palladium is a hardware hack to dig the private key out of individual chips. With one of those keys you can run a palladium emulator in software and have total control.
The bad news is that every chip has a different key, and if you share the key with other people it will quickly be spotted and that key will be voided. You dig out one key and it's good for one person.
The good news is that once someone with the right equipment does it he can crack chip after chip all day long. He just has to keep a low profile. Perhaps set up shop in the country of Tokelau.
The result is that you will have a limited number of "elites" who are totaly above the system. It's the worst of both worlds - virtually everyone will be crippled under DRM, content will still be leaked onto the internet, and you still can't trust software that is running on someone else's machine.
-
Re:Privacy (Score:1, Interesting)
- they'll fully release the specs to this farce, and it'll be broken quickly, or
- they won't release the full specs, people will find the system suspect but use it anyway, and later, it will be broken.
I'd like to say that this doesn't matter to me at all, because I'm implementing my plans now to free myself from Microsoft dependence, but it does affect me. There will surely be tons of commerce sites on the internet that will use Microsoft, and I'm going to want to know which ones they are (so I can avoid shopping with them).It's safer to bet against Microsoft in this, and that's what I'm doing. Every new day brings a few less people that don't own a computer, and that means fewer people to glitz and glam into shitty Windells machines. Microsoft fucking Palladium up will be the death knoll of the company. People will realize that Linux isn't just a viable option but that it's a superior product with almost infinite configuration. Instead of buying new licenses for every machine in the building/campus/company, people can pay a Linux guru to configure their system once, then have the sysadmins run and maintain the systems. This happens now, and it'll only get easier. Windows configuration might be easy with the flashy menus, but there aren't any guarantees that training for those menus will apply to the next version change. You can still use #!/bin/sh scripts today that you wrote years upon years ago. Nobody uses Linux, then says, "Gee, I want something less powerful and more flashy." Anyone with a gruntle [jwz.org] about Linux video/graphics/sound will only find that it's gotten better, instead of just changing, but then again, I have no problems with mplayer. It works better than Windows Media Player, seeing as how I don't have to upgrade to mplayer version 9.0!!!! once my computer eventually realizes that version is available, and disables the current player to force an "upgrade."
Nobody owns the keys (Score:5, Interesting)
The keys are generated internally in the secure hardware. They are public and private keys, and the private keys never leave the chip. Neither Microsoft nor the user nor the chip manufacturer can get at those keys.
These keys are used by the secure hardware to lock data and to report a hash of an executing "secure" program. Because no one else has the key, neither the user nor Microsoft, no one can forge such a message (modulo the issue of breaking the hardware security).
This is how Trusted Computing has to work. If anyone could get access to the secure keys, then they could misuse them and make false statements with them, and there would be no trust and no security. Only by embedding the keys in a well-defined piece of hardware, with predictable and known behavior, can the keys serve to transfer trust to other software.
So when we see these complaints about the users not controlling their own keys, keep in mind that the point is not to put control in someone else's hands; it is to make it possible for the hardware to make trustworthy and believable cryptographic statements. The keys can't be owned or controlled by anyone, for this to work.
The Palladium Path : Some Urgent questions (Score:2, Interesting)
Would this mean fewer 'blue screens', fewer crashes, fewer halts, fewer bugfixes, fewer patches, fewer servicepacks, fewer windows updates ? Or
God NO, this would mean MORE of them !
Also, does this mean i'll have to do some extensive upgrading on my computer again ? It's quite hard to believe such an all-round solution would not ever put some extra load on my computer system.
Now i come to think of it, will i need Palladium Certified Hardware ? Will older hardware apply as well ?
Or do i just stick to good configuration and good software ? Or revert to encrypted letters by post ?
Re:Privacy (Score:2, Interesting)
I believe there will also be the attack of exploiting a known buffer overflow, in order to be able to execute code with the (trusted) credentials of the attacked process. [question: what steps can palladium take to prevent this attack?]
This would lead to the situation where you would have to have a certain vulnerable version of the OS/privileged software in order to execute unsigned software in a trusted context. It is not too hard to imagine a scenario where tools which exploit known buffer overflows are the preferred method to execute one's own applications for sage computer users. M$'s only way to mitigate this would be to force mandatory windows updates so that the user does not control which (vulnerable) subversion of their software they are using. (At the present time, for example, the user has the choice not to install win2k sp3).
any comments?
Re:Privacy (riiiiiiight) (Score:3, Interesting)
Heyyyy, that's great.
But what about this? [slashdot.org]. Really, don't be patting yourself on the back too much, or you will fall into the same pit that we have in the U.S. Some dumbass law will get passed wherever you live because your politicians are just as greedy as our politicians. They'll pass it under your nose, or through some back door, or right in front of your face. Then you will be just as screwed as we are.
People from other countries like to think that they are above laws like this. I hope you are right, because it will give me more options when I finally decide I have to leave this country. :-) Just make sure that while you are laughing at our stupid laws, the same ones don't get passed where you live.
Don't get me wrong, I was born here, but my eyes are open. Is the DMCA as bad as some of the human rights violations that occur around the world? No, of course not. But corporations run America, and there is little chance of that changing. I don't know how much longer I can take it.
OK, I'll bite (Score:1, Interesting)
No, it is SLIGHTLY more secure. It is a silly point anyway, since Windows security vs. Linux security is a battle for last place.
STOP. Can you audit the windoze code and then show me how the code backs up your claim that windows is as secure as Linux? Think again.
No, non-MS employees cannot. But I seriously doubt that YOU have, or ever will have, the skills to audit Linux code and then show anyone how the code backs up your claim that Linux is as secure as Windows.