Windows Vista and content protection(holy f...)

Started by
29 comments, last by CGameProgrammer 17 years, 3 months ago
I'm probably way to late for this kind of discussion, and has probably been posted in the lounge before, but i'm not sure of it. I found this document stating some facts and possible repercussions of the content protection mechanisms in Windows Vista I'll quote some sections that I found particularly surprising and alarming:
Quote: "Drivers must be extra-robust. Requires additional driver development to isolate and protect sensitive code paths" -- ATI. Vista's content protection requires that devices (hardware and software drivers) set so-called "tilt bits" if they detect anything unusual. For example if there are unusual voltage fluctuations, maybe some jitter on bus signals, a slightly funny return code from a function call, a device register that doesn't contain quite the value that was expected, or anything similar, a tilt bit gets set. Such occurrences aren't too uncommon in a typical computer. For example starting up or plugging in a bus-powered device may cause a small glitch in power supply voltages, or drivers may not quite manage device state as precisely as they think. Previously this was no problem - the system was designed with a bit of resilience, and things will function as normal. In other words small variances in performance are a normal part of system functioning. Furthermore, the degree of variance can differ widely across systems, with some handling large changes in system parameters and others only small ones. One very obvious way to observe this is what happens when a bunch of PCs get hit by a momentary power outage. Effects will vary from powering down, to various types of crash, to nothing at all, all triggered by exactly the same external event. With the introduction of tilt bits, all of this designed-in resilience is gone. Every little (normally unnoticeable) glitch is suddenly surfaced because it could be a sign of a hack attack, with the required reaction being that "Windows Vista will initiate a full reset of the graphics subsystem, so everything will restart". The effect that these tilt bits will have on system reliability should require no further explanation. Content-protection "features" like tilt bits also have worrying denial-of- service (DoS) implications. It's probably a good thing that modern malware is created by programmers with the commercial interests of the phishing and spam industries in mind rather than just creating as much havoc as possible. With the number of easily-accessible grenade pins that Vista's content protection provides, any piece of malware that decides to pull a few of them will cause considerable damage. The homeland security implications of this seem quite serious, since a tiny, easily-hidden piece of malware would be enough to render a machine unusable, while the very nature of Vista's content protection would make it almost impossible to determine why the denial-of-service is occurring. Furthermore, the malware authors, who are taking advantage of "content-protection" features, would be protected by the DMCA against any attempts to reverse-engineer or disable the content-protection "features" that they're abusing. Even without deliberate abuse by malware, the homeland security implications of an external agent being empowered to turn off your IT infrastructure in response to a content leak discovered in some chipset that you coincidentally happen to be using is a serious concern for potential Vista users. Non-US governments are already nervous enough about using a US-supplied operating system without having this remote DoS capability built into the operating system. And like the medical-image-degradation issue, you won't find out about this until it's too late, turning Vista PCs into ticking time bombs if the revocation functionality is ever employed. Like the medical-imaging degradation example given earlier, it's possible to imagine all sorts of scenarios in which the tilt bits end up biting users. Consider a warship operating in a combat zone and equipped with Vista PCs for management of the vessel's critical functions which does nothing more wrong that to suffer a severe jolt from a near miss, scrambling the bus just enough to activate the tilt bits (without causing any other real damage). In one famous incident in September 1997, Windows NT managed to disable the Aegis missile cruiser USS Yorktown ("NT Leaves Navy "Smart Ship" dead in the water", Government Computer News, 13 July 1998). Now Windows Vista can do the same thing via a by-design feature of the OS [Note L]. This issue, unless it can be clearly resolved, would make the use of Vista PCs unacceptable for any applications that have any hint of unusual environmental conditions such as high altitude, wide environmental variations, shock, and so on.
Other than what I've quoted above, practically all of it is quite astonishing, especially the fact that new security measures(routines/algorithms) must be signed off on by 3 content corporations. I was actually looking forward for Windows Vista, but after reading this, it looks like Windows Vista is taking all the improvements that have occurred in technical openness and cooperation over the past decade or two and completely obliterating them. I feel that if anything would be the downfall of the current mega corps, this would be it. Please someone tell me that Microsoft has rethought their positions on this matter since this article was written? or that it's a hoax? I weep for the industry, and more importantly, the consumer.
Advertisement
With any security system you trade usability for security. If there's too much security, then the system becomes less usable.

As for windows vista, it is treading a fine line it seems. I personally don't have any problems with Windows XP, and if I feel that I need a new operating system to play with, I'll probably start messing around with Linux instead of dropping a few hundred bucks for Vista.
People were making many similar claims about XP before it came out as well. If there's things worth being concerned with about Vista's stability or security, I'm sure it'll be known after Vista is out. I'm just going to wait and see what happens.
"I want to make a simple MMORPG first" - Fenryl
Quote:Original post by Senses777
People were making many similar claims about XP before it came out as well. If there's things worth being concerned with about Vista's stability or security, I'm sure it'll be known after Vista is out. I'm just going to wait and see what happens.


You missed the point. It wasn't that Vista isn't secure or stable (Although the UAC thing has probably, if anything, lessened security).

The point was that this focus on stability/security completely cripples the OS in other ways.
this is like Menthos and Diet-Coke...

You won't die from this.

I remember reading in this very same forums about the armaggedon Windows XP would bring when out, and we are still here.
[size="2"]I like the Walrus best.
I'm also taking a wait and see approach to Vista.

I have had numerous problems with anti-piracy schemes not allowing me to play my legally purchased games while people I know who pirate games have no problems at all. With all the DRM in Vista, I'm definitely wary of putting the OS on my PC for fear of not being able to play my audio CDs, games, movies, etc on my PC the way I like to. I'm going to sit back and watch what happens to other people before I even start considering installing Vista.

Couple that with the fact that I'd need to drop $500 on the version of the OS that will do everything I want it to. That seems quite excessive to me. And I thought Microsoft was being silly charging $300 for XP Pro.
Holy smokes...

Must say I had no idea...To bad the majority of consumers just won't care enough to notice...

I was excited about vista, but Xp is working just fine, and with windows blinds, who needs aero? =)
The content protection system requires end-to-end support. OS, motherboard, video card, and monitor. All of those pieces must support the chain, or nothing happens. Vista is the first piece to show up with it because the software is fairly easy to do, and there are no implications for the end user in having an unused driver.

The **AAs have a dream where they can make media that will not play without this entire chain. The goal is to have a signal that is encrypted and shielded all the way to the monitor, protected by public-private key encryption and support the TPM. They're the ones you should be angry at. The various ISVs and IHVs are being pushed around by them. So, don't buy any media that forces you to do this. Break the chain somewhere if you like. Vista's just a sleeping warning.
SlimDX | Ventspace Blog | Twitter | Diverse teams make better games. I am currently hiring capable C++ engine developers in Baltimore, MD.
@Promit, unfortunately, this still had to be developed, and that development cost money that is going to be passed on to us, not to mention the fact that any of the hardware manufacturers that decide to implement support for this will also pass that cost on to us.

I thought the goal of technological advancement was to make things less complicated, easier to use, and less costly for the everyday user. This is going to take that and completely shove it.
Quote:Original post by deathtrap
I thought the goal of technological advancement was to make things less complicated, easier to use, and less costly for the everyday user. This is going to take that and completely shove it.


The goal is for shareholders to make money, a lot of money... This strikes me as another step on the path towards turning computers into home entertainment appliances.
"I thought what I'd do was, I'd pretend I was one of those deaf-mutes." - the Laughing Man

This topic is closed to new replies.

Advertisement