On Mon, 12 Aug 2002, AARG! Anonymous wrote:
> I don't believe that is an accurate paraphrase of what Mike Rosing said.
> He said the purpose (not effect) was to remove (not reduce) his control,
> and make the platform trusted to one entity (not "for the benefit of
> others"). Unless you want to
Mike Rosing wrote:
> The difference is fundamental: I can change every bit of flash in my BIOS.
> I can not change *anything* in the TPM. *I* control my BIOS. IF, and
> only IF, I can control the TPM will I trust it to extend my trust to
> others. The purpose of TCPA as spec'ed is to remove my
David Wagner wrote:
> Ben Laurie wrote:
>
>>Mike Rosing wrote:
>>
>>>The purpose of TCPA as spec'ed is to remove my control and
>>>make the platform "trusted" to one entity. That entity has the master
>>>key to the TPM.
>>>
>>>Now, if the spec says I can install my own key into the TPM, then ye
On Thu, Aug 08, 2002 at 09:15:33PM -0700, Seth David Schoen wrote:
> Back in the Clipper days [...] "how do we know that this
> tamper-resistant chip produced by Mykotronix even implements the
> Clipper spec correctly?".
The picture is related but has some extra wrinkles with the
TCPA/Palladium a
