Re: TPM support status ?

[Robert Millan <rmh@aybabtu.com>]

On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 09:53:10PM +0200, Michael Gorven wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 04:01:39PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
>> Can you give a reason not to provide the owner with any of:
>>
>>  - A printed copy of the private key corresponding to the chip he paid for.
>
> Not really, although not having any trace of the private key reduces the  
> chance of it being stolen. I find this point kind of moot though because  
> the chip can be reset completely -- you don't need the private key.

Of course I do.  How else am I supposed to tell this remote website that I am
running Internet Exploiter without actually running it?

It demands a signature that can only be produced with the private key that came
preinstalled in the TPM.  Resetting the TPM won't help at all.

See where this leads to?

-- 
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."