Re: TPM support with SATA drives

[Robert Millan <rmh@aybabtu.com>]

On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 02:08:59PM +0200, Laurent Dufrechou wrote:
> I think in this use case it is ehicaly correct as I try to measure and
> ensure my system is not corrupted. (Must be the only case where TPM chip are
> good at :) )

This is true in fact.  What happens here is that Treacherous Computing
proponents realize they would have no case for marketing their crap if they
just advertized it as "when you surrender your freedom to someone else, this
device allows you to prove you have surrendered it, so that those who don't
can be challenged and wiped out".

So they coupled their technology with other use cases, such as making systems
you own tamper-proof against illegitimate attackers.  There's nothing ethically
wrong with protecting yourself!  But if you use their technology to do it, in
a way you're supporting them.  Next time you buy a motherboard, you'll demand
a TPM in it;  and help make sure every motherboard has a TPM in it.  Then, when
everyone has a TPM around, and uses a TPM-capable software stack, remote
attestation can be implemented in a breeze.

-- 
Robert Millan

<GPLv2> I know my rights; I want my phone call!
<DRM> What use is a phone call… if you are unable to speak?
(as seen on /.)