[Full-Disclosure] Trustworthy Computing Mini-Poll
From: Thomas Sjögren (thomas@northernsecurity.net)
Date: 12/29/02
- Next message: Daniel Ahlberg: "[Full-Disclosure] GLSA: cups"
- Previous message: PHRACK Staff: "[Full-Disclosure] PHRACK #60 HAS BEEN RELEASED"
- In reply to: yossarian: "[Full-Disclosure] Trustworthy Computing Mini-Poll"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
From: thomas@northernsecurity.net (Thomas Sjögren) Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 13:17:23 +0100
On Saturday 28 December 2002 13:51, yossarian wrote:
> I think i might run w/o Palladium - and search the net for cracked
> windows updates, they are availale now, so why should'nt they be in
> the future? I never thought it useful upgrading to a newer office
> since 2000, so why should I do so in the future?
Sure, that's always a option, until MS stops releasing non-Palladium
patches (just like they planning to stop NT4 patches).
> Let's turn the question around a bit: if it is not backwards
> compatible, how am i going to upgrade a 150.000 usr network?
Palladium isn't just software update like W2K -> XP, it's hardware
upgrades as well. So if you want upgrade you're network your probably
have to buy som new computers.
And by the look of it all major hw-manufacturers are members of TCPA
(and Palladium?) so in the Orwellian-future, you can't rely on cracked
patches (does anyone _trust_ cracked patches btw?) to keep your network
up and running.
/Thomas
-- thomas@northernsecurity.net | www.northernsecurity.net thomas@se.linux.org | www.se.linux.org
- Next message: Daniel Ahlberg: "[Full-Disclosure] GLSA: cups"
- Previous message: PHRACK Staff: "[Full-Disclosure] PHRACK #60 HAS BEEN RELEASED"
- In reply to: yossarian: "[Full-Disclosure] Trustworthy Computing Mini-Poll"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
