| "What's Palladium? Depending on who you ask, it's either a catalyst to turn silicon into gold for the PC industry, or it's the stuff the black helicopters are made of." -From Wired's article Palladium: Safe or Security Flaw?, by Paul Boutin. |
Initially announced in the summer of 2002, "Palladium" is the code-name for Microsoft's newest, and possibly biggest, venture. The name comes from the root "Pallas Athena," an ancient Goddess who stood for the security of the city of Troy; Microsoft's Palladium is purported to be the last word in system and internet security.
Since that point, Palladium has undergone a name change. In January of 2003, a Microsoft press release stated that project Palladium's title had been changed to "Next Generation Secure Computing Base." The reasoning behind this change is twofold, the release says - firstly because a large amount of bad publicity had surrounded the Palladium name, and secondly because another company already held legal ownership of the Palladium name. So for future reference, "Palladium" and "NGSCB" are in fact the same thing.
What's so different about Palladium? What makes it better than any security measures that other companies' attempts (and other Microsoft attempts) have done? Part of the answer lies with Intel and AMD - Palladium is a double-whammy operation, working off of both Windows software technology and hardware technology directly on a machine's processor. This, obviously, makes internet cracking far more difficult of a task.
There is little question that Palladium is quite secure. The question is... secure for whom?
Palladium has a number of prominent features it's promising to consumers:
Microsoft claims that this kind of security initiative will be available on non-Windows platforms.
| ""We have a lot of pieces to put together yet, but eventually (NGSCB) will be a standard feature on all PCs," [Bill Gates] said." -From Wired's article Gates Goes From Geek to Chic, by Michelle Delio |
This in itself is a suspicious enough claim, even without knowing the fact that Microsoft has filed patents for its new idea of security.
Patent Information on Microsoft's DRM OS (from Cryptome.org): Part 1 Part 2
Scared yet? If you're not, you will be.
What follows is an attempted in-depth analysis of the Palladium system. If something comes up that doesn't make sense, chances are, it's in a section yet to come. Keep these key terms in mind:
-DRM (Digital Rights Management, which enforces media copyright laws)
-Fritz (the hardware chip that makes Palladium work, named after a DRM-friendly senator)
-Nexus (the software center of the Palladium system)
-Trusted Agent (Palladium-compatible application)
-Vault (a secure, locked-down area of Palladium that stores secure information)
Microsoft has posted Palladium White Papers on the internet. These, more or less, go over the features and details of Palladium - this annotated diagram ("Figure 1: Windows-based personal computer of the future") is especially helpful. Here's a quick overview of how, to the best of the author's understanding, the Palladium system functions.
One key element of Palladium is the hardware. As mentioned before, part of the Palladium system relies on an addition to the chip of the computer (later machines will probably have the Fritz chip embedded on the mother board), which will maintain many Palladium functions rather than the software, because the hardware is far more difficult to crack. The "protected operating environment" consists of the Palladium "vault," which contains the protected information about the user of a Palladium machine. These details will only be let out of the "vault" when necessary, and when validated to do so. This secure storage area also keeps information about the operating system (so that the machine could appear anonymous if the user so desires), as well as any information that a trusted application might want to keep secure from other programs.
Another key of Palladium is the software "Nexus," which essentially controls all Palladium safeguards not already taken care of by the hardware. This manages the cryptography, and determining "Trusted Applications." The separate Palladium environment of a Palladium machine is operated by this "Nexus."
| "Palladium consists of a secure kernel, the "Nexus," with NCAs (Notarized Computing Agents, aka applications) running on this. A content producer or service provider would produce an NCA (e.g. a media player) as a secure mechanism for transacting with the user..." From The Register's article, Of TCPA, Palladium and Werner von Braun, by John Lettice. |
Next, also on the software side of things, we have the "Trusted Agent" applications, which are what make Palladium more than just some fancy technobabble. The Trusted Agents are applications which have been officially approved by Microsoft as Palladium-worthy, things that will not harm your system in any way. While this may have been conceived in the greatest of intentions, there are two inherent flaws in the idea:
1. New versions of software will have to be recertified (a killing blow to open-source software).
2. Shareware, Freeware, and other small apps will likely not be authorized, because it's not really worth going through a certification process (and possibly fee) for it; hence, such things will not work with Palladium.
There's another minor detail that Microsoft likes to forget to mention: the clock. Some Palladium features operate on time, and an obvious way around this would be to change your system clock. Microsoft, despite its relative silence on the matter, has anticipated this.
| "...the designers have thought of many circumvention tactics likely to be thrown at what they call a 'DRM OS,' and the patent lists methods of secure access to the page file, of ejecting untrusted applications off the system, and resetting the system clock against a trusted server." From The Register's article, The Microsoft Secure PC: MS patents a lock-down OS, by Andrew Orloski. |
In other words, in order to enforce many of Palladium's time-reliant security features, a Palladium machine must at least occasionally be online to receive the correct time from this "trusted server." However, it would be foolish to think that these remote server checks are simply for the purpose of time - Microsoft will most likely also put something into this trusted server that will roam your hard drive for unapproved items. Note the second item in that quote: "...ejecting untrusted applications off the system..."
The alternate scenario is that a Palladium machine will be forced, by the user, to not connect to the internet (something as simple as unplugging the online access input, i.e. phone cord, cable, etc.). However, since Palladium requires these occasional checks to work properly, there's a good chance that if it doesn't get access in time, Palladium will restrict itself from operating.
Microsoft insists that Palladium is designed for secure and trusted computer use. But behind that lies another motive - Digital Rights Management.
| "...the same platform could be employed by content creators -- who include software makers like Microsoft. They could severely limit how materials are copied or even how long they last -- a stark contrast from the freedoms of today's computers." -From Wired's article Gates Promotes MS' Security Tech, from the Associated Press. |
Digital Rights Management, or DRM for short, is the concept of technology that does just what it says - manage your digital rights. Big media companies are very enthusiastic about these technologies, because they make copyright circumvention more difficult and copyright holding more financially pleasing. However, managing digital rights usually ends up stomping on fair use, something which consumers often hold dear to without even knowing.
DRM is what stops you from ripping individual tracks from several CDs and compiling them onto one disc for your own use. DRM is what prevents you from making a backup of what you've legally purchased. DRM is what makes commercial music CDs incompatible with your 'untrusted' hardware.
An exclusive report on Palladium, entitled "Microsoft's Big Secret: Palladium," was given to Newsweek magazine, written by Steven Levy, and published for the July 2002 issue on June 24. The report was also posted on MSNBC.com, but after a very short time, was pulled from the website. The article is re-posted here, courtesy again of Cryptome.org.
| "It's a funny thing.... We came at this thinking about music, but then we realized that email and documents were far more interesting domains." -Bill Gates, as quoted in Microsoft's Big Secret: Palladium. |
This quote makes it obvious that, originally, Palladium was Microsoft's attempt to make good with the music industry and police Windows users through DRM. No more of the Napster-esque days of copying your favorite music tracks and giving them to your buddies, or people you don't even know - it becomes the music industry's favorite scenario: everyone who gets it, pays for it.
But don't get the impression that DRM is all about MP3 ripping; that's merely the most prominent argument that DRM supporters use - it could be equally applied to any kind of digital media. South Carolina Senator Earnest "Fritz" Hollings, a loud advocate of DRM, once proposed the inclusion of DRM security technology in all electronic devices. Here's an article about Fritz's proposal on The Register. The processor add-on module that makes Palladium so powerful has been unofficially nicknamed "Fritz" in his honor.
As Gates's aforementioned quote implies, Palladium was originally conceived for the idea of secure media, which is something Microsoft has been after a lot recently with Windows Media Player - but along the way, it evolved into the idea of all-encompassing security. If Palladium could control media file distribution and use, why not control the distribution and use of other documents as well? Why not secure the entire internet - indeed, perhaps the world?
| "...[Seth Schoen, Electronic Frontier Foundation technologist, said] "I fear (such abuses are) likely because some companies will have the motive, means and opportunity to abuse NGSCB. Maximizing profits provides the motive. Market power provides the opportunity. NGSCB potentially provides the means." -From Wired's article Is Palladium Getting a Bad Rap?, by Michelle Delio. |
The Palladium White Papers claim that "'Palladium' will not require digital rights management technology, and DRM will not require 'Palladium.'", but also notes that "...the current software-based DRM technologies can be rendered stronger when deployed on "Palladium"-based computers." As much as Microsoft will attempt to downplay it, DRM is a large part of Palladium.
| "'DRM is a strategic area we've invested in for the last few years,' said a Microsoft spokesperson. 'The patents will help us realize our long term vision for DRM technology.' He declined to outline the vision in question." -From The Register's article Microsoft buys Liquid Audio DRM patents, from ComputerWire. |
Under Palladium, unauthorized media files will simply not run on your computer. No more downloading free MP3s for Palladium users. Ripping music and video from CDs, or downloading said media from the internet, will become things of the past, if Palladium takes hold.
Of course, Microsoft denies that it's in league with the media conglomerates to destroy fair use. They tell us that these security precautions are in the users' best interests. It's true that anyone can set usage restrictions on anything that they have created within Palladium - but it takes more than a little stretching of the imagination to see the practical use of this for anyone but the media companies.
| "Ask yourself how much content you create that you're worried about people stealing. Sure, you've got stuff you want to keep private, but you probably manage this quite successfully already. The people who really want and need DRM are the content suppliers, who will be able to use it to gradually squeeze free stuff (not just 'pirated' stuff) out of the Internet." -From The Register's article DRM is your fluffy friend - Ballmer stakes out MS' turf, by John Lettice. |
Microsoft claims that Palladium will not lock out old, non-"trusted" applications and documents, but that they simply won't receive the "benefits" of Palladium.
| "'Palladium' will not eliminate any features of Windows that users have come to rely on; everything that runs today will continue to run with 'Palladium.' In addition, 'Palladium' does not change what can be programmed or run on the computer platform; it simply changes what can be believed about programs, and the durability of those beliefs. Moreover, 'Palladium' will operate with any program the user specifies while maintaining security. It is important to note that while today's applications and devices will continue to work in 'Palladium,' they will gain little to no benefit from 'Palladium' services. To take advantage of 'Palladium,' existing applications must be adapted to utilize the 'Palladium' environment or new applications must be written. This software - whether a component of a Microsoft Win32®-based application or a new application - is called a 'Trusted Agent.'" -From Microsoft's Palladium White Papers. |
The quote earlier in this page, about "ejecting untrusted applications off the system," runs slightly contrary to this statement. One possibility is that Microsoft changed its mind after the quoted article was written; another is that someone's not telling the entire truth. However, it would seem more likely that, from the statement above, we can infer that Palladium will not wholly own the system it runs on - rather, it would either be an independent operating environment, working side-by-side with Windows.
However again, upon attempting to explain how Palladium works in relation to Windows, Microsoft seems to have caught itself talking in circles again.
| "Palladium is not secure Windows. Not exactly. Nor is it a standalone OS. Not exactly. Manferdelli [Microsoft Palladium general manager] presents it as a sort of parallel OS that is securely ringfenced from Windows, but which doesn't run all the time, and which actually you wouldn't want to run all the time." [...] "...Palladium however is not a full, standalone operating system, but is intended to use Windows services to support the secure NCA apps." From The Register's article, Of TCPA, Palladium and Werner von Braun, by John Lettice. |
Obviously, in the interest of security, a great degree of separation would be necessary between Palladium and Windows; but, according to a speech given by Palladium general manager John Manferdelli (which is discussed in the article quoted above), Palladium relies on some Windows "services" to operate things. This is odd, since logically, Palladium and Windows should be entirely isolated for the security concept to function as intended.
So what does this mean for backwards compatibility? Well, as long as Palladium remains "not a full, standalone operating system," and requires Windows utilities to function, it will probably be similar to an application; a user will most likely need to keep his OS (that is, Windows) regularly upgraded, and a lot of his old stuff might not work right, or even at all. In the event that Palladium becomes a full-fledged operating system - which is not altogether unlikely, since Microsoft could almost assuredly make more money off of that - Microsoft support for everything Windows will likely fall behind in favor of the new Palladium platform, and users will be forced to upgrade (and leave all their old things behind) if they wish to stay in the technological game.
When considering how Palladium will interoperate with older files and applications, it's also good to keep in mind Microsoft's previous backwards-compatibility practices.
For security, Palladium will have to be impervious to outside attacks. This is what the "trusted agent" idea is all about - Palladium will only run programs, or documents, which are allowed to run on it.
But what about the internet?
An internet browser, when visiting a web page, will enable a download of the page's data from the host server to your computer; the page files are then stored in a cache on your hard disk. The browser doesn't display the page directly from the host server; it displays the page from the saved information on your HD. But sometimes, a malicious page author might include viral code within a page (Microsoft's ActiveX allows this rather well), which could harm your computer. Will Palladium stop this?
One way to achieve web security would be to attempt to block out threatening code. This is what current virus scanners do - they detect known harmful code, and block it from being executed (or caution the user about it). However, this suffers from the inherent flaw that new code is constantly being made, and new loopholes are always being found. Microsoft knows this, and isn't going to try to improve an obsolete system for Palladium.
A more secure way it could assure the user a safe web page is to use the trust system - that is, Palladium would only allow trusted web pages to be displayed. This is truly an idiotic idea, for three reasons: web pages are under constant update; new web pages are always being made; and most people are not going to register their pages. The third could be alleviated by allowing an automatic registering system via internet, but this kind of system could be taken advantage of very easily. However, there's a (slightly) less idiotic version of this tactic: make sure that only Palladium-generated pages can be displayed on Palladium.
It would seem that no matter what Microsoft does to attempt to secure the web for Palladium users, there will be significant problems. Chances are, Microsoft will go with the 'trust' solution, of making sure that only pages made with Palladium will display on Palladium. Then comes the problem of getting Palladium-only servers, but that's not too far of a long shot for Mr. Gates.
But then what about other internet uses? Chat rooms, online games? These will probably fall under the same "trust" umbrella as applications - only "trusted" internet-reliant programs will operate, and these programs will most likely be restricted in terms of what they can do. If Microsoft is feeling ambitious, they might even incorporate a system ensuring that, similar to email, you can only chat with people whom you choose to trust, and who use Palladium.
In order for Palladium to be a secure system, all transactions (not just business) must be "trusted." File downloads, offline file transfers, LAN parties, and anything else that requires interaction between two or more computers must be secure and safe for Palladium users. For this to be assured, the sender of any information must be both trusted and compatible.
In today's world, we see compatibility issues all the time. Some things that work with Windows 95 may not work with Windows 98, and rarely will anything from a Mac work on any Windows system (unless it was created in a multi-platform program, and both machines have the same version of this program); with all the different OS versions (even including different versions of the same OS model), it's almost never a guarantee that files from your computer will work properly on your friend's computer.
If Palladium takes hold, it will solve this problem, much like one could solve the problem of a rotten tomato by smashing it into an indiscernible pulp.
Unlike current compatibility issues, no degree of version updates or file format conversion will enable a file from any other platform (including older Windows versions) to work in a Palladium system. Palladium trusts only what it is told to be trusted, and is compatible only with what is trusted. Online file transfers will only work with a Palladium machine if another Palladium machine is on the other end; offline file transfers will be the same. Any computer interaction involving a Palladium machine must involve nothing but other Palladium machines.
So, to add on to the previous speculation about internet protocol (especially email), it is almost unavoidable that Palladium systems will be, in essence, a world of their own; they will be unable to interact in any way with non-Palladium machines. More importantly, non-Palladium machines will be unable to interact in any way with Palladium systems.
If your friend uses Palladium, and you want your computer to interact with your friend's, you'll have to get Palladium too (since it would be unheard of for your friend to downgrade his/her system). Then if someone wants to interact with you, they'll have to get Palladium as well. It's the standard version-update effect, where everyone must get the newest versions to keep up with everyone else - except in Palladium's case, it's less like fazing out old versions to usher in a new one, and more like declaring guerrilla warfare on all other systems. Whereas Macs and PCs once could connect with each other over the internet, Palladium will shut out Macintosh computers (and indeed, all other competitors) entirely. While people with different operating systems could once send files back and forth if they used the same program, Palladium will restrict file contact only to other Palladium files.
If Palladium becomes popular, it will gain the current support of software developers, and lock out the rest of society from the computer-using community. Those who don't use Palladium will either have to start using it, or continue using their old computers (which gradually fall deeper and deeper into obsolescence, for lack of support). Hence, as it does with Windows, Microsoft destroys competitors by making them incompatible.
Meet Tux, the penguin mascot of the Linux operating system. Linux is an open-source development project - innumerable people contributed to the making of Linux, and they continue to contribute. Current Linux builds are available for free, or you could buy a commercial version, which includes CDs, instructions, and maybe some padded coding. Linux is said to be the most stable operating system ever created, and is widely used as an internet server OS for this reason.
Microsoft does not like Linux. Linux gives people a good operating system for free - Linux is taking away Windows business, and more importantly, hindering Microsoft's push into the server market. Microsoft attempted to alleviate this with such Windows-specific internet innovations as ASP (Active Server Pages), but Linux servers remain to be immensely popular.
| "Red Hat chief technology officer Michael Tiemann said computer makers had rebuffed his attempts in recent years to pre-install the Linux operating system on their machines because they feared Microsoft's response." -From Wired's article How Microsoft Went After Linux, from Reuters. |
Another fairly popular open-source development project is the web browser Mozilla, which supports all of the current internet standards, offers some nice development features, and has built-in email, newsgroup, and IRC clients. Like the basic Linux, Mozilla is free. In fact, there are several popular open-source projects running, and because of their user input and constant update, the software is typically reliable, functional, and free.
Clearly, Microsoft has some hardcore competition from open source - after all, you can legally get open-source software for no cost. However, under Palladium, each version of an application will have to be Microsoft-certified in order to run - meaning that the regular builds of Linux, Mozilla, and any other open-source project will be unable to work on Palladium unless each individual build is certified. This is a waste of time and, potentially, money; it hasn't been confirmed whether or not "trusted agent" certification would carry a fee, but it's certainly a reasonable possibility, meaning that developers as well as users would end up getting the short end of the Palladium stick.
Linux ascribes to the GNU General Public License, which "...is intended to guarantee your freedom to share and change free software--to make sure the software is free for all its users." But remember, Palladium requires trust certification before an application will run.
Palladium can't effectively cooperate with open-source software. This in itself is a large hindrance to users of open-source products, especially Linux, if they wish to use a Palladium machine. However, Palladium has more in store for Linux.
Because it is such a wide-spread server OS, and because it is commonly regarded as a more reliable (and less crackable) system than Windows, many E-businesses rely on Linux. However, under Palladium's "Trusted Agent" policies, transacting online business with a Linux machine will likely become next to impossible; not only will the information retrieved from the Linux server probably be deemed "untrustworthy," but in order to get a Palladium user's vital information, the server would be required to use a system that would comply with Palladium's vault.
| "...if I exercise the GPL in any meaningful way I'll render my system 'unauthorized for Palladium' and lose business." -From The Register's article MS to eradicate GPL, hence Linux, by Thomas C. Greene. |
That poor, poor penguin.
| "It's also worth noting that: 'Intel originally turned down the idea before eventually embracing it. AMD had already been thinking along similar lines, and eagerly signed on.' Which looks a little like Microsoft playing the old chippledum and chippledee game to its advantage again." -From The Register's article MS DRM OS, retagged 'Secure OS' to ship with Longhorn?, by John Lettice. |
Microsoft's first successes - BASIC, DOS, and the first versions of Windows - thrived because of their hardware support. Primarily, IBM computer sales enabled Microsoft to earn incredible amounts of money on royalties charged for the pre-installed Windows OS. Similarly, today, Microsoft and chipmaker Intel form a sort of duopoly in the computer market, because of their widespread use in popular hardware vendors such as Dell, Compaq, and Gateway.
The hardware component of Palladium, which AMD and Intel have agreed to participate with, is one of the things that makes Palladium so powerful. This, in effect, makes AMD and Intel the sole chip suppliers for "trusted computing"; and if the platform becomes popular, other chipmakers most likely won't be allowed to produce the Palladium chips, and will be left in the dust, making the two Palladium chip producers the only powerful companies in their field.
| "Microsoft is now far more powerful than it has ever been, and is setting the hardware standards for the PCs you will have to buy far more overtly than it ever has before..." -From The Register's article Gates justifies stronger chains for hardware makers, by John Lettice. |
It's thought that, as technology progresses, the Palladium hardware component will be embedded on the mother board, rather than added to the processor. If so, the chipmaker duopoly stated above may be averted - but then, what of motherboard manufacturers? Will a similar event transpire?
Knowing Microsoft, it's more than likely that they'll pick the most successful, obedient, and/or popular hardware vendors to side with their Palladium venture - to convince consumers that, just because it's Microsoft, it's not necessarily a bad idea. This, again, in the event of Palladium's popularity, will leave competitors hopeless.
| "Under Palladium as I understand it, the Internet goes from being ours to being theirs. The very data on your hard drive ceases to be yours because it could self-destruct at anytime. We'll end up paying rent to use our own data!" -From PBS's article I Told You So, by Robert X. Cringely. |
As mentioned previously, because of its secure clock feature, Palladium will inherently be required to log on to the internet periodically, and check in with a "trusted" (likely Microsoft-owned and operated) server. As also mentioned, this feature could easily be used by Microsoft to roam a user's system for illegalities, such as pirated software, or unauthorized documents.
The ability to check a person's computer for illegal material is something that another organization could benefit from - the government.
If (or rather, when) the government decides that this kind of personal information combing would be necessary for computer law enforcement, international security, and other purposes, Microsoft would have no choice but to allow the feds to peek into a user's system. It may be an invasion of privacy, but so are many other things that governments often do for the sake of 'security.'
Microsoft and the government would likely check a user's system for legal troubles - but there's more that can be done. However, it should be noted for the author's protection that the following is speculation, and not necessarily truth.
Suppose a Palladium user wrote a document explaining some bugs and exploits in a Microsoft program. Suppose an administrator at Microsoft, doing some system roaming, sees this. The admin will have both the means and the motive to delete this document, alert those in charge of the bug, order it fixed, and give no credit to the discoverer; or in fact, simply delete the document and leave the bug unchecked.
Suppose a Palladium user wrote an exposé or critique on the American judiciary system, or perhaps Microsoft's business practices - a 'trusted' server admin could easily get rid of this information, or if it continues, even set up remote restrictions for the user.
Suppose a Palladium user is developing some revolutionary piece of software. Microsoft would have no trouble taking this software for its own, and leaving the developer penniless.
Of course, unless it existed in extremely large and sudden amounts, this kind of behavior would be seen by the masses as rumors and hearsay, conspiracy theories. Little would be believed. In fact, there's not necessarily a good chance of it happening - but the mere fact that it can happen is significant.
If someone was able to crack into a trusted server, he, too, would have this kind of power.
Microsoft vows that with Palladium, it will bring secure, trustworthy computing to the people. But can Microsoft itself be trusted?
| "Ah, Microsoft. It's gotten so much wrong on security for years, and now we are expected to believe that this 'solution' is the only way? You've got to be kidding me." -From Geek.com's article Palladium: Microsoft's big plan for the PC, by Rob Hughes. |
Microsoft has quite a track record, which is to be expected, considering how integral it's become to global computer use. However, it would seem that there are some things that popularity alone can't account for. There are three key facets of Microsoft which may make it seem less desirable as a gatekeeper of security:
First, and possibly most notorious, is Microsoft's business strategy. Not only does MS tend to make its products incompatible with competitors, it tends to make its newer products incompatible with its older ones. This, of course, gets the consumers to spend more money, in the tried-and-true software version system. In a similar fashion, Microsoft will likely stop supporting older software, forcing Windows XP/ME/2000/NT/98/95/3.1/et cetera users to upgrade and spend money, in order that they may participate in the Palladium world. It's also likely that, to ensure more money to come, patch after upgrade after service pack after edition of Palladium will be released - at a cost, of course. And, obviously, competitors to Palladium would not be allowed to thrive, despite antitrust legislation.
| "The European Union will 'ensure that competitors have the capacity to offer the range of services they want to provide, including security..." -From Wired's article EU Warns Microsoft on New Plan, from the Associated Press. |
Secondly, one must regard Microsoft's development history. Countless times, when Microsoft has toted a system as uncrackable, it has been cracked within days. Bug upon bug, exploit upon exploit, back doors, fatal system flaws, Microsoft has consistently released unstable software. There are reports that Windows 2000 was publicly released with over 63,000 known software bugs - whether this was because Microsoft wanted to ensure its own life (see above) or if they simply weren't dedicated to releasing stable software, is open to speculation. Just because Microsoft says that Palladium is secure, doesn't necessarily mean it is.
Thirdly, and perhaps most importantly, is Microsoft's history with security. From Hotmail cracks to Windows back doors, Microsoft products have a clear and well-deserved reputation of being easily cracked - after all, by having Windows leave all 65536 TCP/IP network ports open, Microsoft may as well send the entire internet an invitation to a user's system. Many internet crackers who invade systems as a hobby purposely ignore Windows, because, they say, it's simply too easy. Indeed, sometimes it appears as if Microsoft builds these security holes in themselves: some believe that this is for Microsoft's own purposes, in order that they might have marginal control of consumer systems. There have been few, if any, major Microsoft products which have not been publicly cracked - and which continue to be cracked today.
| "...privacy advocates [are] questioning whether putting Microsoft in charge of computer security is like putting the fox in charge of guarding the hen house." -From InternetNews's article Is Microsoft's Palladium a Trojan Horse?, by Brian Morrissey. |
Flat-out lying isn't helping Microsoft either. On the Microsoft website, user testimonials in the fashion of Apple's Switch campaign have been pulled off the website for being fraudulent - twice. Additionally, a computer used in Microsoft's defense in the American antitrust trial was rigged to perform how Microsoft wanted it to.
Even if Palladium seems a good idea, it's worth noting that it's going to be a product of Microsoft. Will it do what it's supposed to? Will it, in fact, do anything at all - or is it just an over-hyped, minor feature of their next OS?
There are several possible futures for Palladium. One is the tranquil picture of life that Microsoft's public relations division paints - everyone uses Palladium, and everyone enjoys a cyber-life of security and trust. Those who don't use Palladium are, well, unimportant.
Another is more Orwellian in nature - Microsoft and government (or perhaps one of them will destroy the other, and take the reins of full control) will exercise 1984-esque rule over the populace. Your computer will not belong to you, your computer will belong to a global organization; using it is a privilege, one which can be altered and taken away at a moment's notice. Digital Rights Management will come full circle, as in this satirical example.
| "...controlled computing is not at all about protecting you and your stuff, but very much about protecting digital content from you." -From The Register's article Intel's new chip for security Renaissance, by Thomas C. Greene. |
Yet another possibility is that Palladium will falter utterly - perhaps consumers won't buy it, based on its bad PR and association with DRM, or perhaps it simply won't work. Even some Microsoft employees are admitting that DRM may be destined to fail.
Regardless, though, Palladium has plenty of time yet to mature; computer users should be wary, lest they let Microsoft's "trustworthy computing" campaign spread like a plague and overtake the planet.
Now that you're more educated about Microsoft Palladium, you may be asking yourself, "What can I do to stop this madness?" (If you're not asking yourself this, feel free to go along on your merry way)
Want to help halt Palladium? You can:
| "Digital rights management (DRM) is an important, emerging technology that many believe will be central to the digital economy of the future." -From Microsoft's Palladium White Papers. |
For more information on Palladium, you should check the following websites:
Also, a number of informative articles from several news sites are linked to throughout this page. The quotes aren't the only interesting parts.
