> > > But don't forget about the main message: Trusted Computing = The End of
Free.
> > >
> > > I absolutely guarantee you that if Trusted Computing gains a foothold
> > > in PCs, Linux with either disappear for good or be effectively
> > > converted into software as proprietary as Microsoft Windows.
> > >
> >
> > I think that, while a good rally call, it's a bit to extreme, Linux as
> > we know it might very well change, but it seems unlikely that "Linux"
> > will become proprietary. At the worst it'll go fringe and use non-PC
> > devices. Just my 2 cents
> >
>
> I'm sorry for putting forward such a strong statement without any
> facts to back it up. Here are the facts:
>
> *The net effect of Trusted Computing is to allow a single company to
> regulate what software may be run on general purpose computers. In a
> Trusted Computing future, people who choose to load non-approved
> software on their PCs or to disable the TPM chip in their PCs will
> have a functionally crippled computer, or possibly a computer that
> does not work at all.
>
> *What keeps Linux (or GNU/Linux if you prefer) Free with a capital F
> is the license under which it is distributed. The license does this by
> insuring all that all users who have a copy of GNU/Linux can:
> 1. Get the source code.
> 2. Modify the source code.
> 3. Redistribute modified copies of the source code.
>
> *However, when binaries produced by compiling modified copies of the
> source code either _cannot_ be run or will _cripple_ the system if
> run, the benefits provided by the license no longer have the effect of
> keeping the software Free.
>
> *So, Linux will remain licensed under the GPLv2 (or, perhaps, some
> future FOSS license), but the altered technical environment created by
> Trusted Computing will prevent software from being truly Free, no
> matter the license. Only kernel binaries approved by the central
> authority will work properly, but those kernel binaries may
> incorporate restrictions on what the user of the computer may do.
>
> For what it's worth, the Free Software Foundation says the same thing:
> http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/can-you-trust.html => "Treacherous
> computing puts the existence of free operating systems and free
> applications at risk"
>
> WARNING: I ###DO NOT### recommend reading
> http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/can-you-trust.html in order to get
> educated about Trusted Computing. When I read it, I feel a subtle
> implication that a computer incorporating Trusted Computing technology
> is somehow less capable or limited in some way, which is not true. The
> network effect created by the presence of TPMs in most PCs is what
> will take away your freedom and choice.
>
I'm sorry for not laying out my point more clearly.
I was trying to point out that the Linux people will find a platform
that allows them to continue working "F"reely on the programs they love.
I would assume that if the future has TC dominating the desktop/server
landscape Linux users will once more be locked out of many of the
"essential" things. Heck I can even see a loss of email. But we will
still have Linux...
You've convinced me that my earlier statement was too strong. When I
said that Linux might disappear for good...
P.P.S It looks like it comes down to semantics. I don't think Linux
will end because of TC but you seem to be saying something along the
lines of "the network IS Linux". If that's your general thrust then yup
your right, assuming we don't end up creating an alt.net.
...this is exactly what I meant.
I take "network" to mean all kinds of networks, not just IP networks
or networks between devices belonging to different people.
For example, some (or perhaps all, I don't know) printer manufacturers
already include special firmware that uses a watermark to allow a
document to be traced back to the printer it came from. This is to
prevent counterfeiting. However, in
http://www.hp.com/hpinfo/newsroom/feature_stories/2004/04counterfeit.html?mtxs=home-corp&mtxb=B2&mtxl=L1
HP states that it is limited in its choice of anti-counterfeiting
technology by printing speed--they will not include
anti-counterfeiting technology that affects their bottom line by
slowing down printouts to assist in a fine-grained search for
prohibited images.
Adobe Photoshop is a different matter. The latest version will
actively try to prevent you from scanning in money by picking apart
the acquired image pixel by pixel. So it's not hard to imagine a
printer that implements anti-counterfeiting technology by using
Trusted Computing to ensure that it is connected to a computer running
an operating system that prevents its users from executing altered
versions of Photoshop.
Linux could be changed in order to take the freedom to modify and run
certain files away from its users (even root), though I don't think
many Linux users would like this. But since Linux is Free software,
anyone could recompile a version that doesn't have this restriction.
But then the hypothetical future printer would refuse to print out
documents from this "uncertified" version of Linux.
So Linux users of the future who choose not to run highly anti-freedom
kernels will be cut off from networks of all kinds, robbing Free
computers of almost all of their utility.
Eric
|