dslreports logo
site
spacer

spacer
 
   
spc
story category
Intel Chip DRM: Yes or No?
Intel doublespeak clouds the issue
by Karl Bode 12:49PM Thursday Jun 09 2005
The debate continues at Dave Farber's IP mailing list over the existence of embedded DRM on Intel chips. According to Intel VP Donald Whiteside, it is "an incorrect assertion that Intel has designed-in embedded DRM technologies into the Pentium D processor and the Intel 945 Express Chipset family." Whiteside insists they are simply working with vendors who use DRM to "design their products to be compatible with the Intel platforms."

view:
topics flat nest 

Titus
Mr Gradenko

join:2004-06-26
kudos:1

1 recommendation

No

If they're dancing around the truth now, they'll be dancing around the truth from here on out. Put 'em in the bozo-bin with their corporate brethren.

washmutualcommerical

@ny325.fios.verizon.n

Re: No

This reminds me of that washington mutual commercial where they stamp the bar code to the guys forehead and send him off to another long line! First they implant every chip with a remotely readable serial number, next they want to make sure you pay for all that software you load onto the chips, wow.. and i'm sure that will lower the total cost of ownership of that chip too!, NOT! if anything, it will be MORE expensive since someone has to pay for all that fancy security they're putting into the chip, those people don't work for free.. and intel is notorious for making a profit, notice that they were salivating for a couple years now with those $500 ipods, wondering how they could get a chance to get in on that honey pot!
el cid4

join:2002-08-12
Burbank, CA

just another reason....

just another reason to keep my old rigs for "those" purposes....

Advoc8

@nftmyr01.fl.comcast.

Re: just another reason....

We're used to having separate boxes for our server, our media server, our game machine, etc. Why not have a separate DRM cleanser box?
Just another reason to buy AMD.
Newegg
Comcast steals modems

join:2004-11-14
Norcross, GA

Compatibility?

quote:
design their products to be compatible with the Intel platforms.
I believe that.

pcscdma
hi
Premium
join:2004-01-14
Winterset, IA

Re: Compatibility?

They should use their own opcode specific to pentiumz celeronz and centrinoz so Centaur and Advanced Micro Devices cannot work with those applications.
--
Posting .sig

guitarzan
Premium
join:2004-05-04
Skytop, PA

1 recommendation

Intel doublespeak?

Oh I see it now.!
Doublespeak=telling twice as many lies.First by covering it.So it doesnt look like shit.Then spraying it to mask the odor.So it doesn't smell like shit.The spin doctors are having a hard time convincing people that smell is of roses.Yet the flys (media) are strangely attracted to it.Proving its shit
Newegg
Comcast steals modems

join:2004-11-14
Norcross, GA

Re: Intel doublespeak?

Well said.
Samwoo

join:2002-02-15
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA

Well its kinda true

If vendors are going to enforce processor drm the only way the processor is going to be able to use the product if it has drm.
So that is your "compatibility"
but then again how does this guy say they are making the chip drm compatible and not?
Well i guess you need more than a processor for the drm tech to work. it seems that this system requires a drm media drm processor and a device that can receive dtcp broadcasts, without the three this drm isn't used.
So there is not embedded drm tech... only the part of a drm tech that is needed to be in the processor. (i mean its not a fully working drm implementation)

shurgs... everything is just to vague today

Transmaster
Don't Blame Me I Voted For Bill and Opus

join:2001-06-20
Cheyenne, WY
Reviews:
·CenturyLink

The Apple rumor

Yes and there is the rumor about Apple using this chip to make the RIAA hate Ipod less then it does now. I'll say it again if Apple does this the Apple Computer it DEAD! I would love to be able to load a standard PC with OS-10 to me that is the fundamental mistake Apple made if they had gone for software instead of hardware how different things would be today.
--
Low voltage Tech's are wimps, Real tech's use 45 pound filament transformers, plate voltages no less then 2400 volts with at least 10 amp's lighting 8877 triodes...BPL I'm coming to get you.

SRFireside

join:2001-01-19
Houston, TX

Re: The Apple rumor

I don't believe that rumor. iTunes is not a money maker for Apple. More like a launching platform for their iPods. The RIAA can't do squat about mp3 players because there is nothing illegal about them whatsoever so I don't think Apple is bowing to such demands. Rather they would be laughing at them.

Certainly there is something going on to make the change. I just don't think the link is the record industry. As you said... that would be much too stupid a reason.

AbBaZaBbA
Premium
join:2002-07-10
Wildomar, CA
kudos:4
said by Transmaster:

Yes and there is the rumor about Apple using this chip to make the RIAA hate Ipod less then it does now. I'll say it again if Apple does this the Apple Computer it DEAD! I would love to be able to load a standard PC with OS-10 to me that is the fundamental mistake Apple made if they had gone for software instead of hardware how different things would be today.
apple's not stuipd. They'd never willingly do this.

Thaler
Premium
join:2004-02-02
Los Angeles, CA
kudos:3

Re: The Apple rumor

Come now...Apple's pulled some boner decisions in the past, just like any other company. Their ability to perform the inconcievably stupid is just as likely as any other company to do the same.

Come to think about it, I can't think of one computer manufacturer period that hasn't pulled a "D'oh!" moment in retrospect.

plk
Premium
join:2002-04-20
united state

I can see it now

......register and about every web site so they can spy on you and share the info with everyone else and serve you up Custom ads and spam. You know this will be abused to hell and high heaven for an extra buck.
--
Thermaltake 2000a/Asus P4C-e/p4 3.4/ocz3500 2x512/WD.2x200g/raptor2x74 raid 0/ATI 9600/APC sua 1500/Logitech z-680/ Samsung 213t LCD/MX 1000
Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO

So what's the issue?

Just out of curiousity I am wondering what the implications are if Intel embeds DRM?

Product makers have every right to insert DRM into their products to restrict it's 'use' if they choose. Obviously software based is not very good as it is easily broken and "patches" are easily distributed. So what is wrong with Intel making this a hardware based solution which will be much harder to crack and certainly harder to distribute?

I guess what I am missing is how this will actually effect a normal user in a bad way.

MrWiseGuy

@lsanca.dsl-w.verizon

Re: So what's the issue?

And we have our first troll folks. No not me. The guy supporting DRM.
Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO

Re: So what's the issue?

So you come here anonymous and call me a troll and state I support DRM because I question the usefulness of this? You may want to examine who is the troll here my little panzy friend.

Regardless of anything you will always have your people that think everything is free for the taking regardless of who "suffers".

Content providers, regardless of what they provide (movies, music, software, video) have every right to set limitations on the use of THEIR content. If Intel and most likely eventually AMD want to help make things more secure with hardware based protection, that is their choice. You and I may not like it and we can decide with our checkbooks, but still it is their choice as it is THEIR material.

Do I support DRM? I truely dont know enough about it to say yes or no and probably wont take the time to learn it. However, what I do fully support is my right to fully restrict the distribution of something that I create. If DRM provides me that right in a better way then before then great, I welcome the improvement.

zeveck

@rsasecurity.com

Re: So what's the issue?

To be fair, Y2K was a not a hoax by any stretch of the imagination. Companies poured BILLIONS of dollars into it such that in every industry where it was going to be a major problem (such as air traffic control, central banking, government weapons control) had the problem mostly fixed well in advance. The media got carried away with stories about it exending to everyday computer usage, but...

If DRM provides me that right in a better way then before then great, I welcome the improvement.

You do not have that right. If you make something and sell it you do not have the right to tell the person what they can do with it after the buy it aside from their ability to redistribute it and so forth. DRM is INCREDIBLY overrestrictive because it is too complicated to make technologies that can make judgement calls, so it always rounds your rights down to the nearest easily programable denominator.

This is not something that it is okay to "wait and see on"...because by the time people realize it's a problem it will be YEARS too late to do anything about it. If Intel does this and OSes are made to require and AMD is forced into it and so forth it isn't like they're going to go back and pull it...despite the protest...because you'd be talking countless billions in losses.

guitarzan
Premium
join:2004-05-04
Skytop, PA

1 recommendation

said by Skippy25:

Just out of curiousity I am wondering what the implications are if Intel embeds DRM?

Product makers have every right to insert DRM into their products to restrict it's 'use' if they choose. Obviously software based is not very good as it is easily broken and "patches" are easily distributed. So what is wrong with Intel making this a hardware based solution which will be much harder to crack and certainly harder to distribute?

I guess what I am missing is how this will actually effect a normal user in a bad way.
Well then Skippy boy. Read this .

»www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14/tcpa-faq.html

Then you will understand how this will actually effect a normal user in a bad way.
Sort of like if I surrender all my rights.How will that affect a normal citizen in a bad way.Perhaps this will be easier to understand.Ask your self. How will a trojan actually affect a normal user in a bad way.? Think man think.
Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO

Re: So what's the issue?

Good or bad, that was an aweful lot like reading the pre Y2k articles -Lots of "theories and opinions" as to what could happen.

Only time will tell and I am going to venture a guess that, just like the Y2k paranoia, most of this is nothing more then conspiracy theory that was written in, what 2003?

POB
Res Firma Mitescere Nescit
Premium
join:2003-02-13
Stepford, CA

Re: So what's the issue?

said by Skippy25:

Good or bad, that was an aweful lot like reading the pre Y2k articles -Lots of "theories and opinions" as to what could happen.

Yunno what they say about opinions, dontcha skippy boy.
--
»www.hermes-press.com/brainwash1.htm

G_Poobah

join:2004-01-17
Schenectady, NY

2 recommendations

Skippy has a point. Intel does have a right to distribute said chip. Hmm.. well, maybe not..

This is no different than selling a car that was unable to go faster than the speed limit, ever. Think about it. They embed RFID chips in the road, then they require all cars to have RFID readers, and those cars will obey the embedded speed limits. So noone can break the law. That would stop all speeding, so we wouldn't need speed traps. Of course, the police would still need to have cars that could go faster than the speed limit. Cause the only ones who would have cars that could go faster than the speed limit would be criminals who hacked their RFID readers in their cars. They'll need to pass new laws to spy on people who speak about bypassing the RFID, cause that would be illegal. Hmm, oh, wait, they already DID pass a law that supresses free speech (DCMA). Well, then they'll just need to require everyone to register with a DNA databank, so when you get in your car, you need to pee in a cup, and it can compare you with a list of know dissidents, oops, I mean, hackers, who 'could' hack RFID's, and the governement could follow those unpatriotic people. The Peoples Republic of these United States knows whats best for us all, and the Patriot Act II will ensure that we remain safe. The fact that the **AA's are buying congress, and trying to force their view of what a computer can legally do is just the natural evolution of a democracy, really. And if you disagree, well, you must be a terrorist, cause only terrorist want to use their computers in a manner that's unfriendly to the **AA's.

Bottom line is that DRM = Digital RESTRICTIONS, Not RIGHTS. The concept of adding DRM to the hardware adds ZERO VALUE to the computer. ZERO, ZILCH, NADA. Everyone knows it except the public. But as you can see from the desperate spin control intel is putting out, having the public know is the last thing they want.
--
Grand Poobah

live free

@verizon.net

Re: So what's the issue?

said by "G_Poobah":
This is no different than selling a car that was unable to go faster than the speed limit, ever.
You are aware, that most cars sold today, have not only built-in "speed limiters" in their computer (meaning, won't go above 'X' speed - not without "chipping" the computer), but also, they include "black box" functionality, in order to log your driving habits. No doubt, that when you go in for your yearly "safety" inspection, they will download your entire driving history for that year into their computer. If that information includes physical location information, that could be superimposed on a map - well, better hope that your travels don't look "suspicious" to anyone. Oh yeah, some states ARE now proposing or implementing RFID transponders into inspection stickers as well. I also know that at least CA is doing likewise with a "remote kill switch" for cars - the cops would just have to point a device at your car, hit a button, and your car drifts to a halt, right then and there. So much for a Constitutionally-affirmed "right to travel".

That all being said - I don't think that *all* "DRM" is bad - DRM enables control. The question is, WHO is given that control. If the user is given complete control over their own machines, and allowed to control their own media works, then I don't have a huge problem with that - it could actually spur the development of a reliable micro-payment scheme for smaller content distributers. (Meaning you and me - imagine getting paid a cent every time someone read one of your posts!)

But if only the bigger corporations / gov't agencies, are given "control" over a user's machine, what it creates, what it is allowed to view - then that is essentially technological *slavery*, and also a widespread platform for post-facto censorship efforts.

In short - it seems directly analogous to the concept of the ownership and control over private property - if the "end-user" is allowed to own and control, then no problem. But if only the "plantation owner" is allowed to control it, then that is a real problem. And that seems to be where things are headed, unfortunately.

Anonymous_
Anonymous
Premium
join:2004-06-21
127.0.0.1
kudos:2
hey all we got to do is buy an older computer
OneHeart

join:2002-02-20

1 edit

Re: So what's the issue?

said by Anonymous_:

hey all we got to do is buy an older computer
All we have to do is buy a computer that does not use the newer chip in question.
--
OneHeart

pcscdma
hi
Premium
join:2004-01-14
Winterset, IA

Re: So what's the issue?

I have 2 Intel chips and 1 AMD chip that don't happen to have this "feature".
AMD Athlon XP, Intel P2 266MHz and the 733MHz Xbox Coppermine.
--
Posting .sig

FTCXtreme

join:2005-03-14
New Braintree, MA

Intels death....

This really pisses me off. I myself love Intel and their
CPUs, I think they are very solid. But with the new DRM, We'll have to stock up on CPUs, because AMD will go this way. When AMD goes this way, we'll have to migrate to Cyrex. This tears me apart in a way because im loyal to Intel, all of my PCs use Intel CPUs, Im not saying I dont like AMD. AMD is a good company but my Intel experience has been great, and I dont want them to go down this road. Oh well...

envoid

join:2002-12-21
Duluth, GA

conflict with reality

Their words conflict each other. Plus, the chipset does have it cuz a new Dell D410 with an Intel 915PM chipset has options to enable or disable it in the BIOS (rev A02). They can say everything they want to, but now I know it's there!!

packetscan
Premium
join:2004-10-19
Bridgeport, CT

In short YES.

I'll re-quote this quote.

" Whiteside insists they are simply working with vendors who use DRM to "design their products to be compatible with the Intel platforms."

Well it obvious from their statement that there isn't DRM software but a frame work that DRM software must tie into.
--
Who do you want to pay off today?
ogre51

join:2002-10-22
Winfield, BC

embedded DRM

I was just wondering if this going to just affect the chips sold in the USA or is the rest of the world is going to have to
live with this as well.I live in Canada and I would be really pissed off if the chip I buy is subject to what I believe is a flawed law written for the big companies in the USA.

POB
Res Firma Mitescere Nescit
Premium
join:2003-02-13
Stepford, CA

Bullshit

Why is this even debatable. How about selling two kinds of systems. One model with the superduper spyware chipset, er, DRM, and one model without. Let market forces decide. Clueless N00bs a la rieve gauche, everyone else a la rieve droit.
--
»www.hermes-press.com/brainwash1.htm