Re: Part 2: System Structure

[Bas Wijnen]

On Thu, May 18, 2006 at 01:49:19PM -0400, Jonathan S. Shapiro wrote:
> > > It seems pretty obvious that we would like to encourage people to move
> > > to open formats. However, this program cannot be run unless the
> > > developer can ensure that its storage is opaque.
> > 
> > This is *exactly* the kind of thing we don't want to allow.  By adding
> > such a property to the system (yes, I still think it's something new)...
> 
> I wrote that badly. I did not mean to say that there were any
> restrictions on *executing* the program. The restrictions concern
> reverse engineering, and the author of the program must have reasonable
> confidence (not TPM-level confidence, just reasonable confidence) that
> reverse engineering cannot occur.

Yes, that's what I understood.  I'm saying we don't want to allow programs
which successfully forbid reverse engineering.

> I have to say: preventing this particular program seems exceptionally
> stupid. Yes, the program itself is undesirable, but if it is necessary
> to run an undesired program in order to let people move to open formats,
> that is not an unreasonable compromise.

But currently any program can be reverse engineered, because in order to
execute it, you get the binary (this is true for things which run on your own
computer).  We are designing a new system which allows much better protection
for all kinds of people.  Some new protections I don't want to offer.  This is
one of them.  And they will not refuse to allow the program as a result,
because they are totally used to the situation as I want it.

We _could_ implement some new protections for people who make proprietary
software.  If we do, they're happy and might demand the same protection from
other systems.  If we don't, they won't even know that it's possible.

Thanks,
Bas

-- 
I encourage people to send encrypted e-mail (see http://www.gnupg.org).
If you have problems reading my e-mail, use a better reader.
Please send the central message of e-mails as plain text
   in the message body, not as HTML and definitely not as MS Word.
Please do not use the MS Word format for attachments either.
For more information, see http://129.125.47.90/e-mail.html

signature.asc
Description: Digital signature