GPLv3 launch
A COUPLE of years ago Linus Torvalds wrote "I think Tivoization is *good*," which led to lengthy discussions.
Support for integrity management in the kernel has been merged. This code makes use of the trusted platform module (TPM) built into many systems to ensure that the system's files (including its executable software) have not been corrupted, maliciously or otherwise.
“What would this mean to Linux as a Free underlying platform?”"It was one of the main reasons for the rejection in the Linux kernel mailing list," writes oiaohm. If binaries are changed (or their 'integrity' not authenticated), then programs won't run.
"Problem is, there are devices where TiVo style security is needed," claims oiaohm, "Like you don't want people tampering with electronic voting systems.
"As I said, there is good and bad to it. Good for very particular uses. You really do want to be able to inspect the source code of a electronic voting machine to make sure it is not stuffed up. You also don't want people tampering with it. If you look around, you can find other valid uses of the tech."
What would this mean to Linux as a Free underlying platform? The GNU/Linux operating system could suffer from this. "Problem is, I would bet almost all the money I have that it will be abused to harm users," concludes oiaohm. ⬆
Video on Trusted Computing:
Comments
Peter
2009-04-03 13:46:01
You don't need to Tivo-ize an e-voting machine. A voter doesn't walk into a booth and log-in as a root user. Tivo-ization exists to allow a computer user root access yet still prevent them from changing the software installed on the machine.
Roy Schestowitz
2009-04-03 13:50:19
oiaohm
2009-04-03 14:12:12
TiVo style can prevent you basically starting anything on the machine bar the intended software. So providing a means of anyone with the machine simply tampering. Normally the voter is not the risk. Its people with more time.
TiVo-ization a voting machine is still a good move. Since by blocking alteration of software as root you also block anyone using flawed services to do the same.
Using selinux and other mandatory access controls under linux you can take way root users power to alter the system. Root user on Linux is nothing more than a virtual construct that is optional. TiVo-ization is more than this.
TPM alteration is basically one more step. TPM protects the boot up process preventing tampering to bypass there. So enabling normal secuirty systems in Linux to be turned into fully TiVo-ization systems with no simple by pass.
Peter
2009-04-03 14:38:56
Generally, I agree with all you say. My disagreement comes with using the term "TiVo-ization" in such a context. The reason being that an e-voting machine is not consumer-owned and controlled. I think saying something like, "Using a TPM on voting machines is still a good move." is more accurate. The point of the term "TiVo-ization" is to point out when trusted computing has become treacherous - since the TiVo is a consumer product.
oiaohm
2009-04-04 13:37:04
You build a TiVo-ization device or a TPM protected voting machine you are using exactly the same tech no difference.
This is the problem with techs they are double sided. Its making sure they are used for good not evil.
NotZed
2009-04-03 12:53:42
The refusal to go to GPL3 is the biggest threat to the future of Linux, but on the other hand it is a fairly insignificant threat to the GNU platform as a whole. I think the kernel developers who keep pushing against it don't realise what a relatively insignificant (however important) component of an entire operating system their hardware abstraction layer is.
Of course, all of the 'proprietary' GNU/Linux vendors love this 'validation' software. They'd hate for any of their users to exercise their legal rights to freely modify the software they own even running on their own property. After all, how could they provide the service of support -- what these customers have paid for -- if they modified it, especially considering these vendors basically paid nothing in the first place (on average) for the software they *sold* to these customers.
David Gerard
2009-04-03 23:07:04
Roy Schestowitz
2009-04-03 23:13:34
The post criticises IBM mostly.