Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Probably for the DRM (Score 1) 52

that is a side-effect of the DICE strategy, not a result of AVF.

Okay, but what about the other two points? Aren't these related to AVF:

a vulnerability in one of them does not affect the security of the others

There is other TEE attack surface, but it's small

Still, would be better (from the POV of some of us) .

primary security benefit of the VM move is

Well, as you say, only 'primary'. And previously one could've set a vulnerable DRM against another secure one.

VMs are a little easier to standardize and update

This is also a bigger deal than it sounds, because earlier, incovenience (to the user and/or coder) would've had stayed an abusive authority's hand.

There are so many ways for video to be pirated

Alas! If that were the only motive for DRM!

Comment Re:Probably for the DRM (Score 1) 52

adding VMs doesn't change anything here

won't make DRM stronger

Are you sure? All these sound like any 'centralization' will be easier and more circumvention-proof:

architecture which will make it possible to remotely verify whether a device is up to date

a vulnerability in one of them does not affect the security of the others

VMs are a little easier to standardize and update

Comment Re:Why would anybody want it to die? (Score 1) 163

For a reasonable (if nerdy) alternative that preserves the flexibility, try out Emacs SES. The data can be pulled easily, into org-mode for e.g. by something like:

#+BEGIN_SRC elisp
(with-current-buffer "test.ses"
(mapcar #'cdr (cdr (ses-range TopLeft BottomRight *))))
#+END_SRC

And parts of the pipeline can be swapped with more efficient programs if needed later. (Such a 'Strangler Pattern' may be tried during adoption as well)

Comment Re:I Hope They Do Go After Search (Score 1) 87

I Hope They Do Go After Search

Focussing on particulars like 'search', 'youtube' or 'products' is beside the point, IMO. The lasting solution to this monopolism is going after the source of their network externalities: in the case of internet companies, the one arising out of 'memory' (or data storage) that the founders of the World Wide Web neglected. Why can't the Regulated Asset Base (RAB, of the 'utility') simply involve developing and enforcing a protocol for that on the lines of IPFS et. al.?

Comment Re:Microsoft is an abusive partner (Score 1) 134

There are 'degrees of openness', but the FSF doesn't seem to want to recognize them.

Two counter-arguments in favor of the FSF:

  • Certifications are meant for ordinary people: being confusing is the last thing they need to be (us tech nerds understand all this anyway)
  • Being even partially 'non-free' leaves a door open for bad behavior in the future: what if, when users realize that, they question the certification they'd followed in the first place? (see previous point).

Slashdot Top Deals

BLISS is ignorance.

Working...