obeygiant said:
What the bloody hell does that mean?!?! I think you posted to the wrong thread.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple, Intel and 'Trusted Computing'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
What the bloody hell does that mean?!?! I think you posted to the wrong thread.
Go Tinfoil hats
good god people, some moron says that TPC chip is on a board on a system you're not supposed to disclose anyway and no one can prove one way or another if it's A) There and B) Used.
Anyone looked at computer boards OEM use lately? a large portion of them have the TPM chip on it. Of course the BIOS and all that other stuff can't talk to it, it's just there in case someone wants to write software to work with it much later.
Maybe they got a board from Intel or some OEM and it happened to hvae the chip on it? Darwin doesn't seem to have TPM stuff in it's kernal - from what I understand that is.
good god people, some moron says that TPC chip is on a board on a system you're not supposed to disclose anyway and no one can prove one way or another if it's A) There and B) Used.
Anyone looked at computer boards OEM use lately? a large portion of them have the TPM chip on it. Of course the BIOS and all that other stuff can't talk to it, it's just there in case someone wants to write software to work with it much later.
Maybe they got a board from Intel or some OEM and it happened to hvae the chip on it? Darwin doesn't seem to have TPM stuff in it's kernal - from what I understand that is.
siliconjones said:If I buy a machine I want to be able to do what I want with it. Free will. Whether we will for good or for bad should be up to us entirely. If you produce a machine that takes away that free will, don't expect me to buy it. I think everyone should feel this way. If you don't you must be one of THOSE people.
I have to agree on this one...
SiliconAddict said:
bloody hell? are you english or something?
intel chips in macs, "trusted" computing, next we'll have viruses.
I purchased both my apple machienes, thus i am a customer two fold, and i DONT WANT what they are implementing here. So, learn to speak for yourself before you give off an odour that I do not share. I purchased my machienes, I will do as I please with them.
shamino said:
Actually, it has a lot to do with home users. The computers home users buy are the same machines using the same software to a great extent as the corporations. Thus the home users can easily be scrod by Hollywood, RIAA, abusive software subscriptions, etc. "Trusted Computing" sounds fish...
It's still a different Operating System than Windows. The x86 Processor has little to do with virus'obeygiant said:
Mike
Wait for the "Apple Genuine Advantage" program
For 7 systems he'd need two family packs, of course.
Otherwise it's stealing from Apple, and you'll have to understand why this "it's my right to copy it as many times as I feel like" attitude will be what forces Apple into node-locking licenses to protect Apple's property. The node-locking will also have the benefit of nearly eliminating the risk that OSX86 will be cracked and be installable on any old Dell - even if driver, motherboard and other issues are solved one would still need to get Apple to activate the copy of OSX for the Dell's TCPA chip.
You don't buy the O/S - you buy the right to use it for an unlimited time (so far, anyway) on exactly one computer (or five, for the family pack). The O/S remains Apple's property, and they can set the T&C as they choose.
Squozen said:
For 7 systems he'd need two family packs, of course.
Otherwise it's stealing from Apple, and you'll have to understand why this "it's my right to copy it as many times as I feel like" attitude will be what forces Apple into node-locking licenses to protect Apple's property. The node-locking will also have the benefit of nearly eliminating the risk that OSX86 will be cracked and be installable on any old Dell - even if driver, motherboard and other issues are solved one would still need to get Apple to activate the copy of OSX for the Dell's TCPA chip.
You don't buy the O/S - you buy the right to use it for an unlimited time (so far, anyway) on exactly one computer (or five, for the family pack). The O/S remains Apple's property, and they can set the T&C as they choose.
ryaxnb said:
An API is used for software programs to communicate with the OS or each other, not the hardware (that would be a driver) TCPA aware apps don't need API's to interface. They can communicate directly with the TPM chips.
Otherwise it would simply be an issue of hacking the OS to bypass the TCPA modules.
if you don't like the EULA, don't install
You do not own a copy of Mac OSX. You own a license to *use* Mac OSX. Big difference.
What about the part where you click "I accept these terms and conditions" during installation?Tupring said:Once something is installed on my Machine it becomes mine, software included. If you don't like it, don't make it available for download
You do not own a copy of Mac OSX. You own a license to *use* Mac OSX. Big difference.
OK - I'll bite
It would seem to me, that without an interface it's invisible and unreachable.
Please explain your logic.
Ummm, how do you develop against something that has no interface?pubwvj said:
It would seem to me, that without an interface it's invisible and unreachable.
Please explain your logic.
This is just a start on what we are going to see, you will pay licence to use you computer. TCPA is just a tool take a away your user rigths, to make pll have to subscribe on their apps/os etc.. With TCPA you're no longer the admin on your computer, you're just an advanced user and your rigths can be taken away from you any time!
If apple implements TCPA they will loose many of the new customers that came to apple because of apples opensource program.
I've owned over 10 macs now, but if apple is going this route i'll have to turn to Linux.
If apple implements TCPA they will loose many of the new customers that came to apple because of apples opensource program.
I've owned over 10 macs now, but if apple is going this route i'll have to turn to Linux.
A new implementation of an old trick
This new security chip doesn't seem like anything new to me. Apple is already using the MAC address of on-board ethernet adapters to uniquely identify a computer. When I changed the logic board on my iMac, I had to reauthorize iTunes to play purchased music because the new logic board had a different MAC address (Apple calls it the ethernet address).
I wonder why they don't just use the built-in ethernet MAC address instead of adding a chip with a digital signature... Can anyone explain?
This new security chip doesn't seem like anything new to me. Apple is already using the MAC address of on-board ethernet adapters to uniquely identify a computer. When I changed the logic board on my iMac, I had to reauthorize iTunes to play purchased music because the new logic board had a different MAC address (Apple calls it the ethernet address).
I wonder why they don't just use the built-in ethernet MAC address instead of adding a chip with a digital signature... Can anyone explain?
ifconfig eth0 hw ether 01-02-03-04-05-06
The MAC address is settable, either through firmware tools or command line (see linux command in title).-Jeff said:
I have an idea... A way of Apple using the TPM to both boost their hardware sales and their software sales. Make OSX86 completely x86 compiled, so it works on any x86 machine, but keep Rosetta needing the TPM. That way, companies like Dell (who have expressed interest in using X on their machines) can put OSX86 and their users can run stuff like the iApps, but (to stop a PPC-Clone fiasco) make all their high-octane apps (like Finalcut or Logic) part PPC, so that they require Rosetta. That way, they have the best of both worlds
AidenShaw said:
jeff-southards-imac-g5:~ jeffsouthard$ ifconfig en0 ether aa:bb:cc:dd:ee:ff
ifconfig: ioctl (SIOCAIFADDR): permission denied
Does anyone know how to do this? I really curious to see if changing the MAC address will unauthorize my computer to play purchased iTMS songs.
sudo ??
http://www.macosxhints.com/comment....2075234315&title=you+must+type+SUDO&pid=47635
Note that OSX preventing the command won't help with the node-locking problem. If you can run XP or Linux or Vista or DOS on an x64 box, and change the MAC address to one that OSX thinks is OK, then you can defeat Apple's activation scheme.
The point of the TPCA chip is that the id is signed, and can't be modified.
-Jeff said:
http://www.macosxhints.com/comment....2075234315&title=you+must+type+SUDO&pid=47635
MacOSXhints said:
Note that OSX preventing the command won't help with the node-locking problem. If you can run XP or Linux or Vista or DOS on an x64 box, and change the MAC address to one that OSX thinks is OK, then you can defeat Apple's activation scheme.
The point of the TPCA chip is that the id is signed, and can't be modified.
Thanks for the tip. I temporarily changed the MAC address and launched iTunes. The licensing agreement showed up, which usually only happens the first time iTunes is launched after an update. However, it did play purchased music without having to reauthorize.
My point is, the MAC address is actually burned in to ROM. Although you can tell the OS to use a different one for ethernet communication, the original one is still there and can not be modified. Apple uses that original MAC address to determine if the computer is authorized to play purchased music.
Consequently, any Macintosh that has on-board ethernet already has a chip that gives it a unique identity, and Apple has been using it for DRM ever since the iTunes Music Store launched (possibly even earlier).
My point is, the MAC address is actually burned in to ROM. Although you can tell the OS to use a different one for ethernet communication, the original one is still there and can not be modified. Apple uses that original MAC address to determine if the computer is authorized to play purchased music.
Consequently, any Macintosh that has on-board ethernet already has a chip that gives it a unique identity, and Apple has been using it for DRM ever since the iTunes Music Store launched (possibly even earlier).
Firmware tools can set the "ROM" MAC address on some systems. Sun servers even keep the MAC addresses in a front panel removable card (so you can move to a replacement server and keep the same MAC addresses).-Jeff said:
If MAC addresses were truly safe, why would we need dongles and TPM?
As I said earlier, the question isn't whether you can change the MAC address on your Mac - it's whether Joe Hacker can change the MAC address on his PC. Apple can't stop the latter, therefore the MAC address is not a sure key.