06-27-2002, 11:45 PM
|
|
Executive Editor
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 29,160
|
|
The dark side of Palladium
http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20020627.html
Robert X. Cringely is easily one of the most well-written and shockingly intelligent columnists I've ever read. His latest column takes on Palladium, and it sure made me do a double-take. Microsoft releasing a proprietary version of TCP/IP? Oh my - smells like trouble to me! Go check out the article - very interesting stuff.
"Last August, I wrote of a rumor that Microsoft wanted to replace TCP/IP with a proprietary protocol -- a protocol owned by Microsoft -- that it would tout as being more secure. Actually, the new protocol would likely be TCP/IP with some of the reserved fields used as pointers to proprietary extensions, quite similar to Vines IP, if you remember that product from Banyan Systems. I called it TCP/MS in the column. How do you push for the acceptance of such a protocol? First, make the old one unworkable by placing millions of exploitable TCP/IP stacks out on the Net, ready-to-use by any teenage sociopath. When the Net slows or crashes, the blame would not be assigned to Microsoft. Then ship the new protocol with every new copy of Windows, and install it with every Windows Update over the Internet. Zero to 100 million copies could happen in less than a year.
This week, Microsoft announced Palladium through an exclusive story in Newsweek written by Steven Levy, who ought to have known better. Palladium is the code name for a Microsoft project to make all Internet communication safer by essentially pasting a digital certificate on every application, message, byte, and machine on the Net, then encrypting the data EVEN INSIDE YOUR COMPUTER PROCESSOR. Palladium compatible hardware (presumably chipsets and motherboards) will come from both AMD and Intel, and the software will, of course, come from Microsoft. That software is what I had dubbed TCP/MS.
The point of all this is simple. It may actually make the Internet somewhat safer. But the real purpose of this stuff, I fear, is to take technology owned by nobody (TCP/IP) and replace it with technology owned by Redmond. That's taking the Internet and turning it into MSN. Oh, and we'll all have to buy new computers.
This is diabolical. If Microsoft is successful, Palladium will give Bill Gates a piece of every transaction of any type while at the same time marginalizing the work of any competitor who doesn't choose to be Palladium-compliant. So much for Linux and Open Source, but it goes even further than that. So much for Apple and the Macintosh. It's a militarized network architecture only Dick Cheney could love."
|
| |
|
|
|
06-28-2002, 01:15 AM
|
|
Ponderer
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 110
|
|
WOW.......
OH..... Microsoft. The company that we all love to hate; and hate to love!
You know; I hate to say it but you just never really know what is up MS sleeve. They have had their eye on the NET ever since it got started. And unfortunately you can't say that it possibly ain't true. Big Corporate Scandal it seems to be found every where these days. :roll: What to do?!?
|
| |
|
|
|
06-28-2002, 01:37 AM
|
|
Pupil
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 33
|
|
AGHAGAHGHA!
8O This is SO why I am mostly a Mac user. Microsoft is so full of itself it is disgusting. And I gotta be honest - although I am a PocketPc user now (since it is superior to Palm), if Apple ever comes out with an improved PDA I am jumping ship so fast. MS can really make me sick sometimes. :evil:
|
| |
|
|
|
06-28-2002, 02:04 AM
|
|
Intellectual
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 140
|
|
You got to give Microsoft credit for trying and heck, they might even get away with it! Doesn't mean I like it - I think it stinks, but there we go.
But why pick on Bill Gates? I thought he'd taken a back seat for Steve Ballmer (spelling?) to take charge? I don't know why but I see Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer (spelling?) as a kind of Tony Blair and John Prescot partnership, one is brainy and charming while the other is always ready for a bit of fistycuffs.
|
| |
|
|
|
06-28-2002, 03:31 AM
|
|
Pontificator
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,329
|
|
I still stand firm to my afore mentioned plane statement. :evil: As evil and totally anti-politically correct as it is.
This company lacks any type of moral core whatsoever. If something isn�t done soon they are going to weasel their way into total control of the net. Won�t that be a cheery day?
Again I'm no longer worried about the government. It�s MS. Computers are KEYS to information. When a company controls those keys what makes them any worse then a government that bans certain information. I don�t know about the vast majority of the cattle�oops sorry consumers out there worry about this but if they aren�t they are:
1. Don�t understand technology and what the ramifications are of this will be.
2. Are cattle that just follow the pack.
3. Are Microsoft apologists that would follow Microsoft into the gates of hell if necessary.
Until Fall of 2000 I was a MAJOR MS supporter. I would go to bat for them. Some Linux lover started hacking on them I would defend MS tooth and nail. But something happened. Somewhere between 2000 and 2001 something happened at this company. MS has always been cocky. EVERYONE knows this. But somewhere in that time span Microsoft went beyond being cocky into actually implementing it in their products. With such things as .NET, product activation both in their OS's and their software products. I think MS wised up to the fact that the antitrust trial wasn't going anywhere and KNEW that were going to get off with nothing more then a slap on the wrist. So what�s the point of playing the good child. I see Microsoft like a child that is allowed to get away with anything. They keep testing the boundaries. When they go to far they get spanked and back away (Last year they made msn.com inaccessible to other web browsers. For about 2 hours. Ya see they got tons of e-mail about this and backed off.) The child is never punished. Never shown that THIS is inappropriate behavior. Every time they go to far they get slapped on the hand by the Justice dept and go about doing their usual.
This is to be expected. MS generates how much revenue for the US? You think the government is going to break that stream?!?!? Heh. Ya right.
I think once this antitrust sentencing is really over you are going to see some serious crap come out of MS. And in response to that I also think virus and hackers are going to ramp up their attacks on MS technology. You see attacking MS products is more then just making a statement about the security in MS's products. Its also bad publicity. The holy grail of these virus writers is a virus so bad. So infectious that it makes its way around the globe in a matter of hours knocking down every MS product it finds along its way. That would put MS out of business in a month. I'll throw a block party the day that happens.
I hate this. I WANT to love their products. But this. This is no way to sell your product.
|
| |
|
|
|
06-28-2002, 04:57 AM
|
|
Pontificator
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,041
|
|
Jonathen1, I couldn't have said it any better! Amen brother. Only thing is, I'm a CNE (Novell), and have usually used products that have been competition to MS (IBM-OS/2). I have been in the business close to 20 years and I have seen this time and time again with MS. Make MS OS/Office products incompatible with other vendors software to the point where you need to switch your application to an MS equivalent. This is not new.
TCP/IP huh? This is REALLY scary! What to do? Well the people who maintain these systems are going to have to say "NO" with a big, united voice. Is this going to happen? Doubt it. Isn't Microsoft already doing something familiar with Java? J++ is what I believe they call it, or C#? What are the programmers doing about this?
I'm a VAR and while MS products are good for computing in general, I hate the upgrade cycle. Technology is supposed to serve the community, not vice-versa. I have a responsibility to my clients and that is to make their systems both performance/cost efficient as possible.
MS servers connected on the Internet are not very cost efficient at all. Gee, how long does it take to install ALL of the patches when building a system? It might even take longer to install all the patches than to install and configure the server.
But what to do? People LOVE Outlook & Office and certainly don't want to use anything else. Peple hate change. Sure you can use Outlook with NetWare, but you lose a lot of functionality with Outlook/Exchange. Sure you can use WordPerfect (version 2002 is SUPER nice) instead of Word, but you have file 'compatibility' issues. There we go again.
What to do? Give the client the choice and have them make the decision. Option A (MS), has a familiar face and is a little more user friendly, but will cost you more purchasing, installing and maintaining. Option B (Novell, Linux, WordPerfect), invovles a little more training, less expensive, more stable and is more secure. Now this is a great simplication since there are other factors involved, but you get my point.
I'd rather fix REAL problems and implement REAL solutions rather than being a plumber. BTW, you know there are NetWare servers out there that haven't been powered down/patched in 5 years? Tell that to the accountants!
Bottom line, the people in charge have to think in a bigger picture than what they do now. It's all about "mind-share" and "warm fuzzy feeling" that MS has been so good at doing. If I.T. managers take the cowardly road with the executive board, then M.S. will keep rolling along just fine.
BTW, I LOVE my IPAQ 3870!
|
| |
|
|
|
06-28-2002, 06:25 AM
|
|
Thinker
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 384
|
|
It will never fly ...
Too much of the internet is powered by UNIX/Linux servers. These are the REAL workhorses of the internet. These vendors will NEVER buy in to a proprietary solution.
Without such support, Microsoft CANNOT make this successful.
|
| |
|
|
|
06-28-2002, 12:54 PM
|
|
Thinker
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 333
|
|
Re: It will never fly ...
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Will T Smith
Too much of the internet is powered by UNIX/Linux servers. These are the REAL workhorses of the internet. These vendors will NEVER buy in to a proprietary solution.
Without such support, Microsoft CANNOT make this successful.
|
I agree with this wholeheartedly. According to Netcraft ( http://www.netcraft.com/survey/) Apache runs 63% of the Web. I also don't think cisco will buy in to MS's proprietary protocol. What's a router going to run? Embedded XP?
|
| |
|
|
|
06-28-2002, 01:58 PM
|
|
Pupil
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 46
|
|
Guys, the only institution that stands firm in the face of change is the graveyard.
If anyone else came up with the idea of better, more secure computing, people would listen. Of course, such individuals or companies may not have the necessary weight to make things happen.
So, it is with all upmost respect to the other posters that I move to the left and stand alongside Microsoft in it's venture.
Cheerio
Howard
|
| |
|
|
|
06-28-2002, 03:16 PM
|
|
Philosopher
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 516
|
|
I've always said that proprietary for proprietary-sake is not good, but if it's proprietary for a good reason, don't be so quick to dismiss it. Now, if this protocol really is more secure, etc., that's fine. The key is that MS needs to go to great lengths to keep this an open standard and get other industry leaders (and the public) involved in accepting and owning it.
Scott
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Linear Mode
