Re: [LEGAL] Crypto as Contraband?

[Bill Frantz <frantz@netcom.com>]

At 1:35 PM -0800 3/8/98, Dave Emery wrote:
>	What scares me, as I have said before on this list, is what
>happens when future tamperproof Intel CPUs acquire the ability to run
>encrypted code decrypted inside the processor and all copies of Windows
>2001 are completely unpatchable and opaque (without breaking the crypto)
>and nicely jiggered to enforce rules about what programs are allowed to
>do what or even run at all.

I think the logical result of the wide-spread deployment of such systems in
the US is loss of leadership in technology.  Modern technology is very
dependent on high performance software.  Between cutting off small scale
development and pissing off licensed developers, it sounds like a way to
cut the nation's throat.

It is hard to see how you could make an OS that prevented you from building
a Touring machine and still support the generalized programming needed for
technological leadership.  I expect that encrypted instruction streams will
only be used for copy protection, probably with the same market acceptance
that other copy protection schemes have received.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Frantz       | If hate must be my prison  | Periwinkle -- Consulting
(408)356-8506     | lock, then love must be    | 16345 Englewood Ave.
frantz@netcom.com | the key.     - Phil Ochs   | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA