AMD To Put An ARM Core On Future Fusion APUs

[0xBADCODE]

You should learn more about this, because it's actually pretty interesting.

It comes down to the fact that MS was using an MD5 certificate somewhere, and that encryption method has proven to be insecure.

You see, I simply lack trust to entities like MS. Using flawed certificate is yet another reason to dislike oppressors but it does not excuses oppression itself. I don't feel safe and secure when these liars offer me no choice but to surrender and consider them as root of trusted authority. This "trust" haves inherently flawed foundation. And ARM TrustZone usually used to restrict user, apply DRM restrictions or conduct other kinds of anti-user "security".

Remember a few years back when some researchers showed they cracked MD5 with an array of 200 PS3's? The Flame authors did the same thing, but using their own attack method. And it was actually before that researcher publicized that it was possible.

I can remember there was story that some collisions were found for MD5 but if I remember well it was not possible to apply it to arbitrary hash. Are there any proof it's possible to collide with arbitrary hash?

When that came out, pretty much everyone abandoned MD5 as insecure, but somehow MS kept using it in a few places that got overlooked.

Still not a valid reason to force me to trust to entities like this. Hence, words about "security" and "trust" are marketing crap. And real purpose is rather to have extended level of control over my hardware to make it acting against my will and interests. Clearly a backdoor-like initiative, unless firmware is opensource and can be checked for absence of backdoors and all keys are replaceable by owner, who can present it's physical proof of presence. For some reason I think it will be not a case and instead this thing would be used to pwn users here and there, lock them down and restrict them. For their own money. Hmmph.

[Decebal]

Well, Intel had these kind of nasties, ARM had it... most probably VIA has it. Now AMD has it, too. They just joined the crowd ! Happy processing !

[V!NCENT]

The only questions that I have, are:
-Can I be in control?
-If not, can I choose to not use it? (aka turn it off)
-Can this trusted crap run in hybrid mode?
-If so, does it require closed source binary code or can it be fully open sourced to the point that it doesn't limit open source development of any kind?
-If it's possible to run in hybrid, then can it be contained in such a way that there could be a fully open source way to protect and 'playback' non-executeable 'protected' content through a open source codec (for example)?

I mean if the last question would be true, then I would be totally cool with it, considdering that the current situation with 'computers' is so fscked up already, that I would buy an overprized, half-assed 1gHz ARM-ish SoC Unsecured computer instead of anything else. It's so fucking sad that the definition of progress now seems to be 1984-ify like hell. Combine that with world-wide corrupted political systems (yes all of them!) and I starting to believe that a burndown of every corner of the 'civilized' spectrum is now worth it. It' worse than living under a tree in Africa! Fuck! :@ /rant

[Decebal]

The only questions that I have, are:
-Can I be in control?
-If not, can I choose to not use it? (aka turn it off)
-Can this trusted crap run in hybrid mode?
-If so, does it require closed source binary code or can it be fully open sourced to the point that it doesn't limit open source development of any kind?
-If it's possible to run in hybrid, then can it be contained in such a way that there could be a fully open source way to protect and 'playback' non-executeable 'protected' content through a open source codec (for example)?

I mean if the last question would be true, then I would be totally cool with it, considdering that the current situation with 'computers' is so fscked up already, that I would buy an overprized, half-assed 1gHz ARM-ish SoC Unsecured computer instead of anything else. It's so fucking sad that the definition of progress now seems to be 1984-ify like hell. Combine that with world-wide corrupted political systems (yes all of them!) and I starting to believe that a burndown of every corner of the 'civilized' spectrum is now worth it. It' worse than living under a tree in Africa! Fuck! :@ /rant

About you questions:
Well, Intel allows to disable EMT in BIOS (although in Win7 my firewall keeps blocking some strange request on IPv6 - which is disabled - made by some EMT components... I guess Demerjian was right about this) . This same thing should go with this new AMD-ARM thing... If not, then it's a BIG problem. Some sources sugest this already exists in Trinity but it's not yet enabled...
I suspect AMD will use this mainly for mobile versions of their chips (now that Intel breaked into this market)... After all, this technology is used mostly there... and individuals with a phone in their's hand aren't so much concerned with this issue anyway.

About your comments: this is the reason why my K6 is kept in a box and this very machine i'm writing right now is going to get stored in a box, too. One can never know when it's time to dig up the gu... no, the PC !!

[V!NCENT]

Starting with the 64bit AMD's, that was already the case. My Athlon 2800+ 32bit only CPU was (I think) the last uncripled CPU that was released. I still have that one.

But for years, the BIOS has been the rootkit already. That's why I love the Coreboot project so much (thank AMD for the server documentation). That's where the switch could be at. Even then it's a matter of IF you can bypass DRM in order to have the computer even WORK and even if you can't switch it off, you can (at least for now with Linux DRM implementation) be in control over the DRM yourself.

DRM and TCP is okay, IF it can be under direct user controll, even if that means not being able to run DRM'd third party content.

But seriously! Give me an opt-out solution if I want to! I don't care if that means not being able to 'pirate'. I don't WANT to pirate! I simply want FREEDOM!

[RussianNeuroMancer]

HDCP not support under Linux. Why everyone think this ARM Core DRM will be supported by Linux drivers?

[popper]

tut, Google "arm HDCP"

http://www.elliptictech.com/zh/produ...cp/hdcp-21-sdk
ESW-02: HDCP 2.1 SDK

The HDCP 2.1 SDK is a proven, robust and cost-effective HDCP-based content protection solution targeted towards OEMs, embedded system and device manufacturers who are looking for a seamless implementation of the HDCP standard. The HDCP 2.1 SDK is based on the latest specification HDCP IIA Revision 2.1 and it supports all mandatory elements of copy protection: authentication and key exchange, content encryption and system renewability. It is backwards compatible with HDCP 2.0.

The framework of Elliptic's HDCP 2.1 solution allows developers to use hardware acceleration for cryptographic operations and offload for embedded processors.

...ARM TrustZone support,Fully portable architecture,Platforms – ARM, MIPS, x86 (32 and 64 bit), PPC, Tensilica,Target OS – Linux, Microsoft Windows, Android, Apple iOS and here's the odd thing, "GPL-free code"

[RussianNeuroMancer]

Okay, there is software that implement support of this. How it may appear in your system if you doesn't want to use it?

[popper]

Okay, there is software that implement support of this. How it may appear in your system if you doesn't want to use it?

no idea, i guess you could always download their HDCP 2.1 SDK and find out then report back if there's real interest

[RussianNeuroMancer]

no idea, i guess you could always download their HDCP 2.1 SDK and find out then report back if there's real interest

Eh, doesn't matter. My point is: there is no sense to care about this ARM kernel until it become working in Linux like in Windows or OS X i.e out-of-the-box (that never happen, just like in HDCP case).