Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Intel Adds DRM to New Chips

Zonk posted more than 8 years ago | from the get-you-where-you-live dept.

Intel 673

Badluck writes "Microsoft and the entertainment industry's holy grail of controlling copyright through the motherboard has moved a step closer with Intel Corp. now embedding digital rights management within in its latest dual-core processor Pentium D and accompanying 945 chipset. Officially launched worldwide on the May 26, the new offerings come DRM -enabled and will, at least in theory, allow copyright holders to prevent unauthorized copying and distribution of copyrighted materials from the motherboard rather than through the operating system as is currently the case..." The Inquirer has the story as well.

cancel ×

673 comments

Sales. (5, Funny)

InsideTheAsylum (836659) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664616)

AMD++

Re:Sales. (2, Insightful)

taskforce (866056) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664635)

Don't count on it, Dell and friends are probably going to lap these things up.

Re:Sales. (1)

Ph33r th3 g(O)at (592622) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664669)

True. The next generation of Dell Optiplexes is going to carry the TCPA "Trusted Platform Module" Fritz/Digital Restrictions Management chip.

Re:Sales. (3, Insightful)

InsideTheAsylum (836659) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664676)

Well, sales at least from me. I built my own PCs (like many people here, I assume) and I can see that people from this crowd will be going AMD only until they get on this as well.

Re:Sales. (3, Insightful)

ZephyrXero (750822) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664672)

Yeah, good thing I was already done buying Intel chips...I just hope AMD doesn't do the same.

Re:Sales. (4, Informative)

NetNifty (796376) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664679)

In the short term yes, but AMD are members of the Trusted Computing Platform Alliance too and might start adding DRM to their chips soon too unfortunatly.

Re:Sales. (2, Insightful)

RoLi (141856) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664777)

True, however nobody can deny that there is a market for non-DRM chips, so some vendor is going to fill that market.

Re:Sales. (1)

alexhs (877055) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664790)

PowerPC++, then.

Re:Sales. (4, Insightful)

Total_Wimp (564548) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664750)

so what do you do when your software requires an Intel chipset because of the DRM capabilities?

AMD has been working for years to make people understand that there is no downside to using their chips. I've used many AMD CPUs and have never had a problem that I've been able to trace to using a non-Intel CPU. But what on earth is going to happen when I try to load software and the error message says "this software will not work with AMD systems" because the software maker demands DRM?

One of three things is going to happen.

1)This will never take off.
2)AMD will adopt DRM themselves.
3)AMD will be marginalized as software manufacturers demand DRM.

Re:Sales. (5, Insightful)

cortana (588495) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664763)

> so what do you do when your software requires an Intel chipset because of the
> DRM capabilities?

Blame yourself, and only yourself, for compromising your freedom with your choice of OS? :)

Re:Sales. (1)

bergeron76 (176351) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664774)

4) AMD will offer a "clone" feature that makes the software think it's DRM'd but actually isn't.

Re:Sales. (1)

DrEldarion (114072) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664762)

The problem with that is that Intel Marketing would find a way to put a spin on this that the general public would believe, and those who would know better than to believe it would most likely already be buying AMD anyway.

Frosty (0, Troll)

Inthewire (521207) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664619)

and pissy

Bye Bye Intel (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12664620)

I know I will be sticking with AMD.... wow... really bad marketing move.

Re:Bye Bye Intel (2, Interesting)

tepples (727027) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664631)

I know I will be sticking with AMD....

Umm... AMD is part of Trusted Computing Group [windowsfordevices.com] .

Re:Bye Bye Intel (1)

InsideTheAsylum (836659) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664646)

Ho damn, that's not good.
Um... at least I could always get pirated chinese chips? Heh.. right guys, right..?

Re:Bye Bye Intel (1)

ZephyrXero (750822) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664710)

Don't worry...I'm sure all the system modders will find some way to sodder this and do that to disable it? At least I hope...

You can disable TPM (2, Informative)

tepples (727027) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664796)

The owner of a machine can always turn off the machine's Trusted Platform Module using BIOS Setup, though works of authorship distributed through Trusted methods will no longer play until the TPM is turned back on.

Re:Bye Bye Intel (2, Interesting)

ZephyrXero (750822) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664687)

Open Cores [opencores.org] , here we come...

Don't bother clicking, its non-existent (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12664739)

Don't bother clicking, its non-existent. What is this, everything2?

Re:Bye Bye Intel (1)

mph_az (880372) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664634)

I'm pretty sure that AMD will implement something similar if they haven't already.

It's "bye bye" fair use, not "bye bye intel".

Re:Bye Bye Intel (2, Funny)

Ph33r th3 g(O)at (592622) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664647)

There's still Cyrix.

Re:Bye Bye Intel (2)

A beautiful mind (821714) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664657)

As long as there are DRM free products, i will use them in all possible cases. I can't speak for the rest of the people, most of them probably just won't care...

Re:Bye Bye Intel (1)

Zakabog (603757) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664744)

When the rest of the people realize their music no longer works they're going to start asking questions. This is when I get to tell them of the wonders of linux, "It doesn't care that you downloaded the song from someone else, it just plays!"

Re:Bye Bye Intel (1)

mph_az (880372) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664766)

It won't matter if they use Windows, Linux, *BSD or AmigaOS; if the DRM is implemented on the hardware level it will still be enforced.

Re:Bye Bye Intel (1)

MoonBuggy (611105) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664733)

I was about to say "But the general public don't care". Then I read this (emphasis mine):
Understood to be a sub-operating system residing in the chip's firmware, AMT will allow administrators to both monitor or control individual machines independent of an operating system. Additionally, AMT also features what Intel calls "IDE redirection" which will allow administrators to remotely enable, disable or format or configure individual drives and reload operating systems and software from remote locations, again independent of operating systems.
It'll be hacked soon enough, people will realise that DRM isn't the good thing that the monopolies say it is and everyone will live happily ever after. Way to shoot yourselves in the foot, Intel.

Nice (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12664622)

A underperforming overpriced DRM-enabled furnace! I so want one...

Re:Nice (2, Insightful)

El Gordo Motoneta (821753) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664648)

Let's see what percentage of the market is actually aware of this and
what it means. ...

I feel when 80% of computers sold include these chips, we will feel
somewhat dissapointed..

Re:Nice (2, Interesting)

ZephyrXero (750822) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664731)

Does someone need to start an informational site called "DRMRipsYouOff.org" or something?

first (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12664623)

first

Well, so it begins (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12664626)

For the U.S. consumer market at least.

But what about consoles (5, Interesting)

Turn-X Alphonse (789240) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664629)

Maybe this will be in the next gen consoles as well? It seems about the right time to reveal technology going in them and "forget" to mention this. Could outright kill mod chipping and pirated games.

Re:But what about consoles (1)

CoolMoDee (683437) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664638)

Except they are all running IBM PowerPC chips...

AMD position? (1)

theefer (467185) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664633)

Is AMD planning to include DRM in their processors as well?

Re:AMD position? (2, Informative)

bersl2 (689221) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664680)

They are a member of TCPA. They have not announced anything yet, however.

Re:AMD position? (5, Interesting)

StillAnonymous (595680) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664721)

If they announce that they are, I'm going to buy the fastest non-DRM-infested available chip they have and then I'm done with all this bullshit.

Maybe buy a little cabin and become a fisherman. Fuck the technology industry. The "content moguls" have fucking ruined it for everyone with their whining control-freakery.

I hope they dig their own graves with this one.

Re:AMD position? (1)

Jugalator (259273) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664775)

Is AMD planning to include DRM in their processors as well?

I'd put it this way: They have nothing to win on not doing it.

Not supporting DRM still won't enable bypassing DRM features, it'll just make their motherboards not support them. What good will that bring to AMD? It'll make them lack a feature vital for the end user's "media experience" according to Microsoft, and it'll make the users feel they bought a crappy motherboard that maybe won't work with e.g. iTunes in the end user's eyes. If they on the other hand do support DRM, at least one can still make use of locked down DRM'ed material. DRM itself may be a horribly stupid way to distribute media, but hey, it's AMD's choice of not letting the users do something or letting them do something (although in a restricted way).

One noble reason for them not doing it might be to make DRM'ed material less useful since they wouldn't support it, but come on, it's the greatest thing since sliced bread for many media companies, even without any hardware support. This'll now be their next wet dream with even Intel supporting them. And if AMD wouldn't do it, but the world's largest software company and the world's largest desktop CPU manufacturer doing it, I feel nothing will change in the DRM push, and AMD just have losses to look forward to if they don't join the bandwagon now. It'll probably just accelerate now, AMD with them or not.

What about CPU IDs? (4, Insightful)

KingDaveRa (620784) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664637)

Remember the hoohah over CPU IDs a few years back? They were supposed to enable software suppliers to keep track of things. There was so much of a kerfuffle that most BIOSes now have a function to disable it. I can see this going the same way when it turns out it causes Windows to BSOD or something stupid.

retrocompatibility? (5, Interesting)

dario_moreno (263767) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664641)

What if the systems have to be retrocompatible ? The re must be a flag to detect if the processor is a 945, and if not, software decoding happens. By making the system believe the processor is pre-945, there must be a way to circumvent the protection (does not work of course if a 945 is required, but this will need another three to five years).

time to sell your intel stocks (1)

donutface (847957) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664644)

Congratulations Intel, now your only real customer will be Dell, never buying another intel processor in my life.

idiots.

fun for hackers (5, Interesting)

maharg (182366) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664652)

from TFA: Additionally, AMT also features what Intel calls "IDE redirection" which will allow administrators to remotely enable, disable or format or configure individual drives and reload operating systems and software from remote locations, again independent of operating systems. Both AMT and IDE control are enabled by a new network interface controller.

lots of fun to be had with this I think..

Re:fun for hackers (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12664738)

Just think, a worm gets through your firewall via a laptop, your network spends 3 days as zombies, and then the whole thing is wiped. Pretty.

New hax0rspeak (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12664747)

You're not 0wned, your system management has just been involuntarily outsourced.

Re:fun for hackers (1)

ZephyrXero (750822) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664752)

Damn, this'll be a security nightmare...

Re:fun for hackers (5, Funny)

Tobias Luetke (707936) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664757)

finally we can create a worm which installs linux.

Virus Writers (1)

Ironsides (739422) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664764)

lots of fun to be had with this I think..

Imagine the first virus/spy ware to come along that takes advanted of these "features". After a viruse sends itself out to create enough new drones, it wipes the disk. Alternatively, a piece of spyware might be able to use this to prevent itself from being uninstalled, in addition to installing even more crap on you system.

Athlon! (3, Insightful)

krudler (836743) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664653)

I've been using AMD for years because of the price/performance ratio, their quality, and the fact that I like to support competition. I really hope that AMD doesn't bow down to the man and do the same thing. I'm really surprised that Intel would make such a move when they are battling AMD so fiercely.

This could be the reason that AMD takes over the lead. I know I'm not buying DRMed crap and I'm telling everyone I know the same thing.

Re:Athlon! (2, Insightful)

t_allardyce (48447) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664692)

In the end they both answer to Microsoft, period. If Windows won't run or won't play lots of media because the CPU doesn't support something then AMD will support it, whatever it takes to sell units. If you think people are going to migrate away from Windows because this, think again.

Re:Athlon! (1)

linguae (763922) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664719)

AMD makes very nice processors, I agree. Unfortunately, AMD is also a part of the Trusted Computing group, meaning that if they get pressured to cave into demands by Microsoft and Big Media, they would probably will.

If that ever occurs, at least we still have the PowerPC and the Open Cores project.

Re:Athlon! (1)

krudler (836743) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664776)

Those Macs are nice I hear. I hear they're built on something called "yunicks", or "Eunuchs" or something. Anyways, I don't think you have to lose your balls to use one. Maybe Windows should change its name to Eunuchs cause intel will steal your balls off.

Then again, slashdot told me Apple is making a deal with Intel. Maybe they want that awesome DRM technology... You know, to steal your balls.

Disable? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12664659)

Is it like how they used to have that identifiable number on the p3/p4 chips that everyone was so worried bout? And can it be disabled....

PPC (3, Insightful)

apathyonline (886926) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664660)

Well, its a good thing that that the IBM PPC processors don't have built in DRM Go Apple! :)

Re:PPC (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12664694)

What do you mean "Go Apple!"?? Forgot about the iTunes DRM, did we?

Re:PPC (1)

Wesley Felter (138342) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664803)

Apple implemented DRM in software, which can be cracked pretty easily. This is because Apple doesn't really care if their DRM is cracked; they just want to do the minimum necessary to keep the RIAA happy. But if the DRM was in hardware, it would potentially be much more difficult for Apple's customers to exercise their fair use rights. So that makes Apple less evil than the MS/Intel/AMD axis.

Re:PPC (1)

JimmehAH (817552) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664767)

Intel, Microsoft and AMD aren't the only members of this NPO.

IBM is too [trustedcom...ggroup.org] . Won't be too long now, if it isn't there already in some form. I know IBM laptops (including the one I'm typing this on) have had a sort of beta of this for a while now.

Re:PPC (1)

linguae (763922) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664798)

Err, I just found out that IBM is part of the Trusted Computing Group [trustedcom...ggroup.org] . Motorola is on the list, too, in case you are wondering. Apple isn't on the list, but the processors in Apple's computers come from Motorola or IBM, so if all IBM/Motorola offered were DRM'd chips, where can Apple buy chips from?

And don't tell me that Apple can switch to AMD, Sun's SPARC, Texas Instruments, or Transmeta chips; all of those corporations are also on the list, too.

This is the beginning of the end. Unless the OpenCores [opencores.org] project starts making strides in the market, it looks like sooner or later all computer manufacturers would end up caving into the demands made by Microsoft and the MPAA/RIAA, since all of the processors are made by Trutesd Computing members.

This is looking very scary.

Digital Restrictions Management (5, Funny)

t_allardyce (48447) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664665)

How many more times will slashdot get it wrong?

Re:Digital Restrictions Management (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12664717)

Yeah, no kidding. Privileges are managed; granted, denied, controlled, restricted, revoked. Rights are non-negotiable, no further discussion.

Well at least this ends the debate. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12664666)

Not much of a debate anymore in the reasons to buy AMD vs Intel.

Stick with the one that doesn't arbitrarily hamstring you.

p.s. intel's move is also exceptionally stupid in all non-US markets

hmmm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12664668)

I wonder if AMD will follow suit or try and go against the flow? Interestingly I recently acquired a Mac and have been using Mac OS X now for about a month. I like it a lot. If AMD follows suit I just may switch to Mac entirely. My old x86 machines will definitely have to be linux only if it comes to that. Right now they are all dual boot with Gentoo/WinXP.

Re:hmmm... (1)

Ph33r th3 g(O)at (592622) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664682)

Apple will be on board with DRM; they're going to market the Mac as an entertainment platform. They're just smart enough to avoid taking the PR and financial hit associated with actually joining the TCPA. Don't deify Apple--they're out to screw us as much as if not more than the Microsoft/Intel/AMD/TCPA Digital Restrictions Management alliance. Look at iTunes, for example--"kind, gentle" DRM, also known as the camel's nose underneath the tent.

What's the lure? (1)

bergeron76 (176351) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664673)

Intel had better have a good lure to get consumers to buy this.

Consumers aren't stupid (for the most part), and if word gets out that they should avoid this chipset, lesser consumers may just avoid Intel altogether.

Re:What's the lure? (2, Insightful)

prisoner (133137) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664698)

Being stupid has nothing to do with it. How many do you think will be aware of this new deal? Of the percentage that are aware, how many do you think will care?

I think you give the sheeple too much credit.

Re:What's the lure? (1)

bersl2 (689221) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664707)

The lure was not telling them in the first place. Even the greasiest marketing "genius" couldn't put a good spin on this.

Re:What's the lure? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12664713)

>> Consumers aren't stupid (for the most part)

oh... if only...

Re:What's the lure? (1)

Spad (470073) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664725)

People (and by "people" I mean those who buy their PCs off the shelf from Dell or PC World) will still buy Intel.

Certainly in the UK, I could count on one hand the number of AMD adverts I've seen on TV. If you buy a computer, it has to have a "Pentium Processor", otherwise it's some kind of unreliable knock-off.

Now if suddenly AMD-based PCs were more commonly available off the shelf AND Intel got a bad reputation because of these chipsets, then *maybe* some people will start buying AMD instead, but it's far from certain.

Re:What's the lure? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12664753)

Customers are stupid. Sometimes the right people succeed at directing the masses, but most people would sell their soul for entertainment.

Re:What's the lure? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12664756)

Intel had better have a good lure to get consumers to buy this.

Intel makes their money (that is, their volume) on business desktop and server sales.

TFA notes that businesses kinda like this DRM stuff. They think it keeps their secrets more secret, and defends them from the liability of clever employees stealing copyrighted content.

The Blue Men will lure the consumers.

Sigh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12664677)

I've been trying to stay on the Intel side of things for the past three years and they certainly aren't making it easy. I feel some sort of loyalty because they are paying (indirectly) for my education, but this is a little far. Well, I guess this seals it. My next computer is a Mac.

Hey genius... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12664778)

I guess you missed the news earlier this week that Apple may be using Intel chips in the future?

More details needed (1)

Wesley Felter (138342) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664686)

Is this LaGrande or something else? Intel promised that they would sell chips both with and without LaGrande; I wonder if they will stick to it.

Intel has a policy of not adding undocumented features to their products, so where's the documentation? Or have they changed their policy?

Great! (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12664688)

I know there will be a lot of slashbots condemning Intel for this great move, but I really think they should be commented.

First off all, as we all know, the only way to keep something like a cultural production going is DRM. All the experts, like RIAA and MPAA confirm that.
So if you are in any way interested in the survival of something resembling culture and thereby civilization, you have to welcome this.

Second, and even more important to me, let us think about what computers are made for. What is their purpose?
Simple, to make the live of the users more simple. Now how better to achieve this than by takeing as much control from the user as possible and giving it to responsible corporate citizens?
So in that regard, great move by Intel.

Hail Intel!

Re:Great! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12664795)

Trolls need to use proper spelling and grammar in order to be taken seriously. That's rule number one.

Security Flaws Galore? (4, Insightful)

Eagle5596 (575899) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664689)

Their reluctance to talk about specifics on the technology is what worries me. What if their DRM mistakenly identifies something on my hard disk as copyright material and prevents me from using my own very legal data? We can't be sure it won't thanks to jolly old intel.

This ATM and IDE control scares me the most though. Giving some random Joe the ability to manipulate my computer at a level BELOW the operating system!?!? HOO BOY! I can't wait to see how long it will take to patch the security flaws in there, in the mean time the script-kiddies now have a truly cross platform way to 0wn boxes.

When will people learn, you can't make something 100% secure, and security through obscurity is a bad idea? Lets just hope the guys in the white hats can reverse engineer this crap first and figure out a way to save the millions of innocent and ignorant customers who will end up with one of these chips in their box.

Read it (5, Interesting)

The Tyro (247333) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664690)

It's actually quite interesting.

They're not only talking about on-chip DRM, they're also talking about a "feature" called Active Management Technology in their new chipsets.

By the sounds of it, it's a firmware-level mini-OS that allows an administrator (or presumably anyone with the password, or the appropriate exploit) to, and I quote:

"remotely enable, disable or format or configure individual drives and reload operating systems and software from remote locations, again independent of operating systems

Frankly, that worries me quite a bit more than the DRM.

Re:Read it (1)

Wesley Felter (138342) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664771)

This just sounds like a cheaper, built-in version of IPMI which is already included in servers from tier 1 vendors.

Re:Read it (1)

DigiShaman (671371) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664785)

I'm just waiting for the RIAA/MPAA to get legal action to remotely format the user harddrive.

Gee...now which politician had this very thing in mind? Hmmmmm

Re:Read it (1)

rpozz (249652) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664787)

The thing that's most concerning about that is that the problem of doing that sort of thing on a corporate network can be solved with network booting. A home user would have no use for that whatsoever. Why have they put in in? (puts on tin-foil hat)

DRM ... (2, Insightful)

vlad_petric (94134) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664691)

is good until someone breaks it. In the best case scenario for Intel & media partners, it'll take a modchip (something on the memory bus, for instance) to bypass this. In the worst case scenario, software.

"Secure hardware" is an amazingly difficult thing to achieve (by secure I mean secure from its user, of course). For instance, in the late 90s, smartcards were hacked by figuring out bits from their keys with differential power analysis.

Wrong way around (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12664754)

What you propably wanted to say:
DRM is bad until someone breaks it.

See, that's better now, isn't it?

Bad Step (2, Interesting)

StratoChief66 (841584) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664699)

Provide a feature for someone other than those who are paying for your product? Yeah, um, lets see how that works out for you pal. I will personally avoid these things like the plague.

Free world? (1)

logik3x (872368) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664700)

Soon BIG BROTHER will also include a governement spyware in INTEL processors for better control of Oceania.

UID? (1)

thpdg (519053) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664703)

Isn't this going to be close the unique ID numbers that were on chips a few years ago? So a media file or player can check and see what ID proc it's running on, and only ever run on that number again? Where is the outcry now? Don't people care about their privacy and rights? They fought so hard before, but now it's acceptable? People are suckers!

i smell trouble... (1)

kreativemind (872620) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664714)

With recent DRM techniques as Intels next CPU, i can only predict trouble in the near future and hacks/reverse engineering to disable the DRM strict rules. Hopefully AMD won't take the same route of doom as Intel is putting in their corporate future. But then Intel maybe smart after all and allow consumers to disable at will the DRM restrictions! Lets see how far Intel and other companies go with DRM.

Re:i smell trouble... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12664742)

If you can disable it then what good is it? I thought the whole point of DRM is that it takes control out of the user's hands.

Guess what I won't be buying? (2, Funny)

rump_carrot (644292) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664727)

Anyone?

I still think.... (2, Interesting)

Asprin (545477) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664730)


I still think it might be possible to defeat this with an emulator.

So what will this do to Intel sales in China? (2, Interesting)

ahfoo (223186) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664741)

Hasn't it been publicly stated numerous times that the whole reason China was pusing for localized Linux was to avoid having hidden backdoors on PCs in China that the government had no control over? If Intel is really installing a sub-system that is specifically designed to re-direct information it seems like a pretty obvious violation of that stated policy. It's hard for Intel to say they didn't know about it when it has been rolled out pretty much every time the topic of Linux and China gets mentioned in the IT press.
And is it just China? Don't a number of other countries have similar policies? This seems like it could have serious implications for Intel's global position. The US market is big, but it's not necessarily where the PC growth is coming from over the next few decades.

Re:So what will this do to Intel sales in China? (1)

David Horn (772985) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664788)

If I was responsible for leading development on Linux kernels, it would only take a few million bucks for me to sneak in something useful to America.

Besides, if China's that pathetically paranoid then they probably deserve to have their computers looked into from the outside. What could possibly be so important they want to hide it?

Besides, knowing MS and networking, it won't work anyway - ever tried to Remote Desktop into another machine over the net when machine in question is behind a router?

Re:So what will this do to Intel sales in China? (1)

iggymanz (596061) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664800)

China will of course evolve its hardware capabilities to make its own processors. I was wondering if they would also put in their own backdoors to enforce policy regarding approved internet/media content, but maybe leaving the ability to process censored content makes the guilty easier to find.

Intel 955 and nForce 4 (2, Insightful)

Sporkyone (887806) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664749)

I see no mention on DRM tech in either the Intel 955 chipset or the nForce 4, so I see no reason why I won't buy a motherboard based off these chipsets. I also don't see any mention of DRM in the first dual core cpu Intel released, the Extreme Edition 840. All you people saying "Boycott Intel" are jumping the gun, just as I would expect slashdotters to do... Besides, what is DRM built into a chip going to do? If I have an mp3 without a drm tag will it delete it for me? There goes my completely legal mp3 collection...

Why? (1)

Helge9210 (759666) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664755)

Is it for current WinXP or for future versions (like Longhorn)?

Hmmm (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12664759)

In other news, shares in chipmaker AMD rose approximately 254798%.

Start writing (2)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664768)

From the article: However, Tucker ducked questions regarding technical details of how embedded DRM would work saying it was not in the interests of his company to spell out how the technology in the interests of security.

Also FTA: Additionally, AMT also features what Intel calls "IDE redirection" which will allow administrators to remotely enable, disable or format or configure individual drives and reload operating systems and software from remote locations...


Good grief, Intel, do you still believe that security through obscurity works? You're waving a big honkin' red flag that tells me this is going to be a hack magnet, and you think they're likely to be successful at it if they figure out how it works - and make no mistake about it, the blackhats WILL figure out how it works.

This is absurd. We all need to let Dell, Toshiba etc. know that if their systems have this functionality enabled, we will be shopping elsewhere.

I think I speaqk for a lot of us when I say (0, Troll)

ian rogers (760349) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664769)

OMG WTF!!!!!

One more reason to stay with (1)

Man in Spandex (775950) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664780)

... CYRIX!

AMT based attacks? (2, Insightful)

pontifier (601767) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664784)

anyone see their new remote administration "feature" as a possible remote security hole regardless of OS? perhaps we just trust that it is 100% secure and unhackable. Additionally, AMT also features what Intel calls "IDE redirection" which will allow administrators to remotely enable, disable or format or configure individual drives and reload operating systems and software from remote locations, again independent of operating systems. Both AMT and IDE control are enabled by a new network interface controller.

Re:AMT based attacks? (1)

pontifier (601767) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664793)

that last bit is a quote from the article.

Long term (1)

Leroy_Brown242 (683141) | more than 8 years ago | (#12664799)

In the long term, is there any way Intel can make users need this? Like content that will only work with DRM. Or better yet, have the entertainment industry force people into this DRM hardware.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...