
<!-- Parent-Version: 1.77 -->
<title>Can You Trust Your Computer?
- GNU Project - Free Software Foundation</title>
<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/can-you-trust.translist" -->
<h2>Can You Trust Your Computer?</h2>


Who should your computer take its orders from?  Most people think
they call “trusted computing”, large media corporations
(including the movie companies and record companies), together with
computer companies such as Microsoft and Intel, are planning to make
scheme is called Palladium.)  Proprietary programs have
included malicious features before, but this plan would make it
Proprietary software means, fundamentally, that you don't control what
surprising that clever businessmen find ways to use their control to
version of Windows was designed to report to Microsoft all the
Windows Media Player required users to agree to new restrictions.  But
have the source code.</p>
In the past, these were isolated incidents.  “Trusted
computing” would make the practice pervasive.  “Treacherous
computing” is a more appropriate name, because the plan is
designed to make sure your computer will systematically disobey you.
general-purpose computer.  Every operation may require explicit
The technical idea underlying treacherous computing is that the
computer includes a digital encryption and signature device, and the
keys are kept secret from you.  Proprietary programs will use this
programs will continually download new authorization rules through the
don't allow your computer to obtain the new rules periodically from
the Internet, some capabilities will automatically cease to function.</p>
Of course, Hollywood and the record companies plan to use treacherous
computing for Digital Restrictions Management (DRM), so
that downloaded videos and music can be played only on one specified
computer.  Sharing will be entirely impossible, at least using the
succeed, but that is no excuse for the system.)</p>
plans to use the same facility for email and documents—resulting
read on the computers in one company.</p>
disappearing ink.</p>
illegal or morally outrageous, such as to shred your company's audit
the activity.  With treacherous computing, the reporter won't be able
Treacherous computing becomes a paradise for corruption.</p>
Word processors such as Microsoft Word could use treacherous computing
when they save your documents, to make sure no competing word
Word format by laborious experiments in order to make free word
processors read Word documents.  If Word encrypts documents using
treacherous computing when saving them, the free software community
we could, such programs might even be forbidden by the Digital
Millennium Copyright Act.</p>
Programs that use treacherous computing will continually download new
authorization rules through the Internet, and impose those rules
instructions telling all computers to refuse to let anyone read that
document.  Each computer would obey when it downloads the new
instructions.  Your writing would be subject to 1984-style retroactive
erasure.  You might be unable to read it yourself.</p>
application does, study how painful they are, and decide
applications will automatically download upgrades that will do
something different—and they won't give you a choice about
whether to upgrade.</p>
Today you can avoid being restricted by proprietary software by not
if you avoid installing proprietary applications on it, then you are
application programs and tools on nonfree operating systems; this
falls short of fully giving you freedom, but many users do it.</p>
Treacherous computing puts the existence of free operating systems and
all.  Some versions of treacherous computing would require the
operating system to be specifically authorized by a particular
company.  Free operating systems could not be installed.  Some
versions of treacherous computing would require every program to be
specifically authorized by the operating system developer.  You could
how, and told someone, that could be a crime.</p>
support treacherous computing, and to prohibit connecting old computers to
people often use Word format for communication, although this causes
several sorts of problems (see
<a href="/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html">“We Can Put an End to Word
Attachments”</a>).  If only a treacherous-computing machine can read the
oppose treacherous computing, we must join together and confront the
situation as a collective choice.</p>
For further information about treacherous computing, see
<a href="http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/users/rja14/tcpa-faq.html">http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/users/rja14/tcpa-faq.html</a>.</p>
To block treacherous computing will require large numbers of citizens
to organize.  We need your help!  Please support
<a href="http://DefectiveByDesign.org">Defective by Design</a>, the
FSF's campaign against Digital Restrictions Management.</p>


<li>The computer security field uses the term “trusted
computing” in a different way—beware of confusion
between the two meanings.
<li>The GNU Project distributes the GNU Privacy Guard, a program that
implements public-key encryption and digital signatures, which you can
differs from treacherous computing, and see what makes one helpful and
the other so dangerous.
someone else.  A treacherous-computing application would let you read
package, makes security features available to the users; <em>they</em> use <em>it</em>.
Treacherous computing is designed to impose restrictions on the users;
<em>it</em> uses <em>them</em>.</p></li>

The supporters of treacherous computing focus their discourse on its
<a name="beneficial">beneficial uses</a>.  What they say is often
correct, just not important.
Like most hardware, treacherous-computing hardware can be used for
other ways, without treacherous-computing hardware.  The principal
difference that treacherous computing makes for users is the nasty
consequence: rigging your computer to work against you.</p>
freedom, while offering minor benefits to distract us from what we
would lose.</p></li>

<li>Microsoft presents Palladium as a security measure, and claims that
presentation by Microsoft Research in October 2002 stated that one of
the specifications of Palladium is that existing operating systems and
applications will continue to run; therefore, viruses will continue to
When Microsoft employees speak of “security” in connection with
protecting your machine from things you do not want.  They mean
types of secrets Palladium could be used to keep, including
“third party secrets” and “user
secrets”—but it put “user secrets” in
context of Palladium.</p>
The presentation made frequent use of other terms that we frequently
“malicious code”, “spoofing”, as well as
you trying to copy music.  “Malicious code” means code
your fooling Palladium.  And so on.</p></li>

<li>A previous statement by the Palladium developers stated the basic
premise that whoever developed or collected information should have
an unprecedented system of control.  The specific problems of these
goal we must reject.</li>

<hr />

<p>As of 2015, treacherous computing has been implemented for PCs in
providing a platform for remote attestation to verify Digital
Restrictions Management.  Thus, companies implement DRM using other
methods.  At present, “Trusted Platform Modules” are not
only current uses of the “Trusted Platform Modules” are
has surreptitiously changed the system in a computer.</p>

<p>Therefore, we conclude that the “Trusted Platform

<p>This does not mean that everything is rosy.  Other hardware systems

<p>This also does not mean that remote attestation is harmless.  If
to users' freedom.  The current “Trusted Platform Module”
is harmless only because it failed in the attempt to make remote
attestation feasible.  We must not presume that all future attempts
will fail too.</p>

<hr />

Software, Free Society: The Selected Essays of Richard

<div id="footer">
<div class="unprintable">

corrections or suggestions can be sent to <a

        replace it with the translation of these two:

        translations.  However, we are not exempt from imperfection.
        Please send your comments and general suggestions in this regard

        <p>For information on coordinating and submitting translations of
        our web pages, see <a
        README</a>. -->
Please see the <a

<p>Copyright © 2002, 2007, 2014 2014, 2015 Richard Stallman</p>


<p class="unprintable">Updated:
<!-- timestamp start -->
$Date: 2015/05/26 05:58:18 $
<!-- timestamp end -->