Re: DRM vs. Privacy

[Michal Suchanek]

On 11/8/05, Bas Wijnen <address@hidden> wrote:

> On Mon, Nov 07, 2005 at 02:06:34PM -0500, Jonathan S. Shapiro wrote:
> > 2. If we disclose the master disk encryption key, then we similarly
> > cannot build highly trusted federations, and we expose our users to
> > various forms of search -- some legal, others not. I am not sure that I
> > want to build a system in which an employer can examine the disk of an
> > employee without restriction.
>
> On any system I envision, any other system does not exist.  If the employer
> wants to be able to search without restriction, he can arrange that it's
> possible.  The problem here is that he doesn't need to install the system
> unmodified.  In fact, he doesn't need to install the system at all, he may
> choose a different system if spying is so important for him.
>
> So I think this is a battle which cannot be won.  Therefore it is better to
> not even try, and instead build a system which does what the owner of the
> machine wants (which is this case is the employer).
>
But there might be a machine owner that *does* want privacy. Sholdn't
the OS do what he wants?
Or put another way, you can install a system that supports privacy but
require your users to give you the capability to read their data. So
such system can be used in *both* cases.
On the other hand, a system that does not support privacy (or other
protection) can not be later extended to do so.
This has been already said quite a few times. I wonder what is so
difficult about that :)

Thanks

Michal

--
             Support the freedom of music!
Maybe it's a weird genre  ..  but weird is *not* illegal.
Maybe next time they will send a special forces commando
to your picnic .. because they think you are weird.
 www.music-versus-guns.org  http://en.policejnistat.cz