Intel quietly adds DRM to new chips

[somebodeez]

Intel 945 Express Chipset(R) family do not have unannounced embedded DRM
technologies.

This tells me they aren't denying that there's DRM inside. What this says to me is that they are denying it was unannounced.

[vitualis]

There are existing DRM compatible technologies in all CPUs. You're not "missing out" by getting an Athlon. What Intel is saying that the Pentium D and new chipset doesn't include anything new (which is what the rumour suggested).

Regards.

[mikesbytes]

In a sense Cyrix is still around. They were bought by VIA and their technology is in VIA's Centaur chips. Low power, low performance X86.

What happend to the transputer (or trasmitta or whatever it was called). After hearing how much better it was that Intel, it disappeared off the horizon.

In the end, probably most of the public won't care what brand CPU is inside. Along as it has enough grunt to display web pages and do email.

[junkmalle]

What happend to the transputer (or trasmitta or whatever it was called). After hearing how much better it was that Intel, it disappeared off the horizon.

Transmeta is still around:

http://www.transmeta.com/

Trasmeta's chips never lived up to their promises. It was always a case of "Well, our current chip isn't quite good enough but our next one will be killer." By the time the next one appeared the market had moved on (Pentium M) so once again their chip wasn't good enough and they promised the next one would be the real killer.

Last I heard there is only one manufacturer (Toshiba?) still using Transmeta chips in an ultralight laptop sold in Japan. I believe the company is changing their focus to become an IP vendor -- they will not be designing full CPUs, just licencing their technology to others.

[vitualis]

Yep, their no longer making chips but selling their IP.

The Pentium M (especially the ULV versions) simply made the Transmeta chips redundant.

Regards.

[ROBERT BLACK]

Has ANY new information about this come to light? I was recently looking at buying a dual core CPU/Motherboard until I remembered this thread. DRM chips/clandestine or announced and I'm sticking to buying a single core 2nd computer.

[DereX888]

well, this kind f stuff is *never* announced by any manufacturer, intel or amd or anyone.
Come on, its like asking i.e. Microsoft to announce in press release all the bugs of Windows Vista few days before it is shipped to the stores

The DRM on a low-level, chip-embedded or alike, will surface sooner or later.(if there is any)
Shit like that can't be hidden for too long. Its always the matter of a right person being involved or simply curious, as it happened lately with sony's rootkit on their CDs and Mark Russinovich who was just being curious, and many other cases.
But you will never know for sure whats lurking underneath of your chip.
If you want to be 100% safe - get a Cyrix 133MHz or something like that :P

[ROF]

It's not really a secret. Intels official position is that it's not in their best interest to release further information about what the DRM is or how it works. Although it has never been officially announced the Pentium M has recently begun shipping with DRM Enabled. Anyone hear about this?

[ultraman36]

Hey can someone explain how the DRM works? For instance how would that work against say copying dvds? What does it physically do?

[thevoelk]

When I set up my new desktop at work (Pentium D), I did notice something weird. I installed Win XP 32 bit while waiting for our site license for x64 to be updated. After formatting away Dell's XP install and using mine, I was left with one Unknown Device. I looked up the Hardware ID string on Google, and it was repeatedly found as a Trusted Computing Module. The listing wasn't there in x64.

Since I'm somewhat restricted at work what I can do on my workstations, I wasn't too worried about it. It was kind of interesting that it needed a driver, so I probably could have gotten away without installing it in terms of performance, I had to to make a deployment image. Since I slipstream hotfixes and drivers into our installation disc, I'm guessing that the TCM driver is part of the chipset, and Windows found an earlier chipset on the XP CD that was compatible but could not identify what the TCM was with the included drivers. I reran the Intel Chipset package and the unknown device had disappeared after the reboot.

[harrisonford]

This report is false, Intel backed away from this story long ago, please spare the recycle junk. Please use a search engine to finish the report on how the Intel Exce over-stated DRM in this chip and how Intel backed away from this story, and this story is so old and dead, sorry to tell you this thread is silly

[harrisonford]

Read online about TCG; it is a chip by its self, not inside or installed in the 945 chipset or in any other chipset. There are some very good resources on TCG and it is DRM in the worse way.

To avoid DRM/TCG ..... get out and buy a ASUS PC DL mobo, dual xeon with 3.2 gig chips for power without DRM/TCG chip, in a 604 socket, it is your last chance to buy a powerhouse computer without all the future MPAA and RIAA and any other scumbag setting his finger print all over the inside of your computer. Have a nice DRM day, RIAA says your welcome, lmao

[MozartMan]

Hey harrisonford,

What is TCG and do you have any links?

[jagabo]

TCG = Trusted Computing Group

http://www.st.com/stonline/press/news/year2005/t1655m.htm

"Intel is shipping its first series of motherboards that make use of the new security chip. The Intel® Desktop Boards D945GNTLKR, D945GTPLKR, D945GCZLKR..."

[somebodeez]

Intel chipsets add support for HDMI, TPM and NAND Flash-based BIOS in 2006


http://www.tgdaily.com/2005/12/29/intel_ich8_ic9_preview/

When Intel launches its next-generation microprocessor architecture, the company will also introduce a new chipset platform as part of what the company calls a "refresh" to take advantage of new features. Users will see several features that enable and restrict the use of High Definition content, legacy removal and an effort to relocate the BIOS into NAND Flash memory, TG Daily has learned.

(snip)

This TPM is believed to be essential for Apple, as it is expected to restrict the installation of Windows software on Apple devices. For Windows users, the TPM is tied to Microsoft's Windows Vista on an operating system level: Vista will include Microsoft's "NGSCB" (Next Generation Secure Computing Base), which promises to provide an added level of protection, for example from phishing attacks, but also has all the capabilities to provide an extensive digital rights (DRM) system. It is powerful enough to let content providers determine how we will be able to use digital content such as audio, video and software.

No Vista for me!

[oldfart13]

Not looking to upgrade to a 945. An 820 would be overkill for me so that is what I'm shooting for now that their prices have come down considerably. This will sure beat doing Mpeg to AVI conversions on my current PIII system...

[Morse2]

Hi guys;

All this talk about hardware level DRM confirms my conviction that Vista will never find a home here. If you too want to avoid the "new and improved" hardware, here are a few thoughts about avoiding a DRM tainted system.

1. Moore's Law no longer holds true - thus there is little impetus to buy a new PC for "higher performance" in the future (assuming you are already using something that has "good enough" performance for you).

2. Parallel computing solutions abound, allowing the use of low cost "obsolete" PC's in higher powered installations. Look up "Beowulf DIY Openmosix cluster" on Google if you want more info. If you're afraid of the penguin (Linux systems), then you can still easily build a "manual cluster" with 2000 Pro, XP Pro, x64 Pro, or even XP Home provided you invest in a KVM (Keyboard Video Mouse switch permitting multiple computers on a single keyboard, monitor, and mouse) along with a gigabit ethernet link (so the computers can exchange data - in a binary cluster, this can be as simple as a single "cross patch cable" directly linking the computers). Warning! Building a cluster can become an obsession....trust me on this one....

3. Given the low demands of internet and email applications, only a single low powered machine ever needs be connected to the internet, while higher powered video rendering engines can remain safely independant of outside meddling.

4. When the consumer stops buying M$ DRM tainted garbage, they will go out of business (if you find the thought that a monopoly can go out of business unbelievable, look at what happened to the nationwide monopoly that the A&P chain had on groceries in the 1920's - or at IBM's 1980's experience). YOU can help this along by helping out relatives, friends, etc rebuild their old generation machines to useable configurations (rather than just "buy a new one" when their existing box is so spyware/bloatware laden that it's useless). I've done this repeatedly, and it is a most satisfying feeling! Deactivation of XP's built in "spyware features" will also be appreciated by your friends (look up "XP Antispy" for a starter, and then look up VLC media player as a Media Player replacement, etc.). An elderly P3 with 256M RAM can indeed run XP (and much less is req'd for '98SE!) well enough for "joe sixpack's" computing needs, so long as all the bloatware is just a bitter memory.

5. My current rig, built on socket 939's and socket A's is quite adequate for all my needs, and with some additional parallel boards as time and $$ allow, will carry me on into my remaining twilight years. (Though I'd love to add some dual processor 940 boards, the dual core 939 works fine for a light server - Manchester Core 3800+ is a great performer for the $$!).

6. If you want to pursue this sort of "milk a good enough system 'till it dies" strategy, a. standardize on a socket/chip type and stock 'em up as they go on sale (and are "obsolete") b. learn how to recap a board; electrolytic caps are the achilles heel of modern PC's as far as longevity is concerned c. keep good airflow or use water cooling - heat is the mortal enemy of electronics and PC's are no exception d. in the worst case, knowledge of "obsolete equipment" will allow you to completely rebuild a trashed system (fire/burglary/vandals) with low cost parts.

7. For your video captures, don't forget to stock up on some "pre analog hole legislation" cards! Might not be a bad idea to look into DVB and FTA ("Free To Air") technology to get access to entertainment sources outside those controlled by the Plutocracy that runs the US.

8. For music, who needs DRM? LP's work fine and can easily be captured, with the "pops" removed. Moreover, there is an abundant supply of pre-DRM CD's that is available second hand (do not "feed the beast" by buying new CD's and DVD's!!).

9. HDTV? Completely un-needed and it will never be found in my house - at least as long as it is tainted by DRM. If, as, and when digital tv broadcasts are mandated for the US, then I'll go completely over to foreign entertainment via free satellite. You can do the same, too.

Just some thoughts from a grumpy old computer geek who is waiting for a server to defrag...

Hope I didn't put anyone to sleep.
Good luck and all the best!
Morse

[somebodeez]

Thank you, Morse 2! Sounds like very good advice.

I do plan on keeping my current cap card for a very looooooooong time along with my previous one (ATI AIW 8600 DV I think...) and looking to see what else we have in the back of the closet.

[Morse2]

Hi Somebodeez;

Yep, the old "back of the closet" computers can make a great internet gateway on a cluster machine. Just don't hook them up at all directly - use the KVM so that you can set your rendering engines, capture machines, servers, etc to their tasks and then go online with the internet machine, using the same controls but no direct machine to machine interaction). You've beaten the DRM/spyware/adware/virus/worms/etc out there - at least as far as your "good" computer is concerned. For file transfers and downloads, flash drives work well and can be scanned to ensure no hidden surprises are waiting to hit your AV cluster.

Even if you don't have a "back of the closet" computer, the same strategy can be followed very cheaply - I just checked a couple of online wholesalers and was able to find a number of motherboard/VGA/CPU bundles for between $74 and $125 NEW IN BOX that would be fine. Just add a power supply, hard drive, freeware Linux distro, and some extra space in an equipment rack (DIY or second hand is the ticket there - 19" music racks, scientific equipment racks and server racks are ALL built to the same dimensional standards) and you're off!

Here's another thought - if you really want to build a robust computer that is secure from outside tampering, clone the system HD once you have a stable install of your OS (and ALWAYS keep your personal files on separate HD's from your system drives - at least build a separate partition!), then leave the clone drive in storage. If the system is ever "fouled up" by a worm (or turned "off" by some future DRM scheme) you just reformat the system drive and copy back the "clean install". Much faster than doing manual rebuilds all the time, and a great way to use a 10-20 GB drive you have laying around that's too small or slow for video work.

All the best,
Morse (3 HD's defragged on the server, 5 left to go....)

[DereX888]

@Morse2:
very good thinking and advice, bravo

I have 'spared' countless older supposedly 'obsolete' machines same way. Usually I start with the same question: "what do you expect from your computer?", and the answers are usually the same too ("web/email/chat", sometimes music & video as well).
Almost everyone have machines powerful enough to do these tasks, their problem is only usually bloated OS (ie WinXP) and the spyware crap residing on them.
Hardware-wise I usually ask the owner to buy as much RAM as he/she can afford, but if they can't - its not a big deal, as last as machine has 128MB or more.
Windows 2000 solves the OS problem (configured right it takes as 'much' as 50-70MB of RAM). Disabling IE and its related crap (dcom, activex etc) and installing better browser - i.e. K-Meleon, or FireFox, solves future spyware problem. Add good, non-IE-dependant antivirus (i.e. Kaspersky) and its all set.

Major 'blockage' is usually the owner/user itself. I always have problem explaining to a total layman why IE is bad for them. The force of habits is another problem (they used IE for so many years they just can't imagine using another browser). And yet another common obstacle are people used to DOS-based Microsoft crap OSes, they often can't grasp the idea of an 'administrative priviledges user' and 'limited priviledges user' and why tthey should not always be logged on as root...

But in general its alwas good to show them some working example (I usually carry my old old old tiny acer travelmate 300-series notebook with pentium 233 and 144MB RAM running Win2000, with k-meleon dressed as IE, KAV, etc - this machine is usually 'lesser' than what they have, yet it outperforms theirs )
It all depends on the user and their needs.

Oh, and lets not forget another usual myth - people often think that faster computer will give them faster internet browsing or downloading They usually don't believe that the 'slowdown' is their ISP not their machine (as last as it is at least a pentium mmx), and buying 100/1000 ethernet card won't solve this problem


PS
I gave up on linux. Its 'geekness' is not suitable for average Joe, and unfortunately it will take another 10 years until some of its flavors mature enough to the user-friendliness level of say Windows 2000, however I found latest ubuntu to be already a progress in good direction.

[Morse2]

Hi DereX888;

We're definitely on the same page here. IME it's easier just to do a clean install on an older machine (using the owner's legitimate MS installation key along with an OEM Windows install disc) to avoid the bloatware that D*** and the other major system makers dump on 'em as "free".

Haven't tried Kaspersky - these days I'm using AVG on the server and Avast on the workstation (Avast is the only x64 Pro freeware antivirus I know of), though I've tried Bitdefender too.

Definite agreement on the use of non-IE browsers. Firefox/TBird is a nice small footprint system though I'm still using Mozilla on my internet machine. I shouldn't forget Media Player Classic either - it's got a smaller footprint than the bloatware M$ makes default.

Great idea on the use of that 233Mhz machine! Come to think of it, I should see about kitbashing a 19" rackmount chassis for an old 400Mhz HP I lucked into for $20 a while back. That would make a nice internet gateway and let me free up a socket A machine for auxiliary video capture duty (bit of a waste using a 2800+ Barton for email!!).

LOL on the "I need a faster computer for internet browsing!" I've heard that one pretty often too, and it's always good for a chuckle. Similarly the bit where people think a faster processor will load windows lightning fast - HD is the bottleneck there, and unless they're willing to foot the bill for a striped raid 0 array for their OS.....

Good point on Linux - I've had a love/hate relationship with it for some time. Warming up to it a bit more lately, since it seems better suited to the distributed processing model I'm gravitating towards (I LOVE the idea of a true Parallel Virtual Machine configured for high performance!). Even if I shell out the big $$ for a copy of Windows Server 2003 Enterprise edition, the best I can build is a load balancing rather than high performance cluster - and according to M$, I would need one license PER SOCKET (so much for my dreams of migrating my server to a socket 940 dual board!).

Guess the take home message on all this is - even if the Evil Empire types make DRM a hardware issue, there's plenty of great hardware already out there that is NOT DRM tainted.

5 HD's down and 3 to go....
All the best,
Morse

[DereX888]

@Morse2:
forget Evil Empire and their stupid licencing ways and prices, since linux is free and perfect for clustering (unless you want to go not-so-legal ways).
Hopefully one day they'll choke on it. I'll be laughing if it happens when they'll release some finally good OS, but people will be really fed up with them and won't buy it anymore

All the best to you as well

[vitualis]

Let's try to keep things factual. I think that we need to remember that Firefox is actually more "bloated" (insofar as memory footprint) than IE6. IE6 works great on a low spec machine (e.g., my Pentium MMX 233 fileserver) where I wouldn't think of using Firefox (not that I do any browsing on the fileserver).

I don't use Firefox because it is "smaller" than IE. Rather, it is safer and has features that I like.

I'm pretty sure that is the same situation between Thunderbird and Outlook Express as well.

Regards.

[DereX888]

Let's try to keep things factual. I think that we need to remember that Firefox is actually more "bloated" (insofar as memory footprint) than IE6. IE6 works great on a low spec machine (e.g., my Pentium MMX 233 fileserver) where I wouldn't think of using Firefox (not that I do any browsing on the fileserver).

I don't use Firefox because it is "smaller" than IE. Rather, it is safer and has features that I like.

I'm pretty sure that is the same situation between Thunderbird and Outlook Express as well.

Regards.

Firefox without plugins is... almost same crap as IE is (IMHO), while with basic plugins it is way too heavy for older machines - I agree. Not that I'm bashing FF, as a multiplatform browser it probably have to be that way.
Thats why I mentioned K-Meleon browser, which is mozilla for *windows only*.
It runs great even on a machine with mere 32MB RAM and some suckiest CPUs.
Unfortunately there isn't much K-M development going on, but actually it doesn't any but the update to latest gecko rendering engine (which is available on the official site).


But vitualis, youre missing the most important point of opening user's machine to any not-so-skilled hackers with the use of Internet Explorer, what is way way way less possible when using Firefox.
I never 'bash' IE for its functionality, IMHO IE4 when it came out was the best browser at its time (functionality-wise, because in 1997 not many people were much concerned about browser's security, at least I wasn't, and functionality was more important to me...), however having entire system exposed with hundreds of holes in IE is unacceptable, and thats why IMO someone should have sue microsoft for deliberate crippling of users Windows OSes. Class-action suit like it would have happen to car manufacturers selling unsafe cars would be appropiate.


You say you want to keep things factual :O
OK, here it is, a more factual comparison:

**********************************************

FACTS (as of today):

IE 6 have 21 still unpatched holes (11 rated as critical!), with some still unpatched by Microsoft, yet existing since first browser release (2002!)
http://secunia.com/product/11/
- heavy (70MB full installation file, expanding to god knows how much after installation) and resaource-hungry and still buggy, as well as completely uncustomizable browser (appears to be light and starting fast only thanks to being crafted deep into Windows OS and being pre-loaded with every boot); not completely up to the web consortium standards; require only latest Windows OS and modest CPU/RAM; laughable 128-bit encryption, with imitation of privacy protection (just a cookie acceptance control and website's zone assignment LOL!)

Firefox 1.5 have 2 non-critical holes
http://secunia.com/product/4227/
- moderate and ligh-footprint (5MB install file, expandable to 15-20MB after installation), but highly customizable, runs on Win98 and later, require modest CPU/RAM, 100% compliant with web consortium standards; with great privacy protection (countless plugins available)

K-Meleon 0.9 have no known holes (zero, zilch, NONE, etc...)
http://secunia.com/product/3684/
- very light (~4.5MB install file, expandable to ~12MB after installation), very customizable (but not as much as FF), runs probably on any Windows and any machine with very little RAM and slow CPU as well, runs lightning-fast even on a slow machine, and starts as fast as IE if its loader is used (similar to pre-loading IE), also 100% compliant with web consortium standards; best privacy protection (built-in controls for everything important, possibility to use plugins as well)


those are the facts

**********************************************


If you really suggest Internet Explorer to anyone, perhaps you should at least promote IE5.01 instead of IE6, since it has only 8 unpatched holes versus 21 in IE6, which makes IE6 the most buggy and unsafe browser ever written!

[vitualis]

If you read what I write on the forums, I heavily promote Firefox!

I wouldn't suggest to anyone that they use IE in any form.

However, Firefox isn't some magical beast. The installer may be small, but it is not more nimble or bloated than IE. That is not a reason to use Firefox. Firefox is great because of its features (tabbed browsing, extensions) and relatively safety (as you have stated).

Regards.

[somebodeez]

I mostly use Firefox but find sometimes that I still need to bounce on over to IE for some websites.

I don't understand all about Morse2's clusters and like DereX888, Linux is too geeky for me but I do get the general idea :
Keep 1 PC for doing the online stuff and keep the working PC off line so nothing sneaky can be done to it and make use of what you have since it still works and yes indeed, my personal files are always on their own drive 8)

Luckily this is is a household that hardly ever throws anything away

[Rich86]

If Intel puts out a product that we find unsatisfactory - we should not buy it. If everyone does that, watch how fast things change.
If we continue to endorse these behaviors (with our money) - then we have no reason to complain when manufacturers continue to respond to RIAA & MPAA whining by reducing functionality and getting away with it.
Let the MPAA & RIAA buy all those dysfunctional chips . . .

[gadgetguy]

If Intel puts out a product that we find unsatisfactory - we should not buy it. If everyone does that, watch how fast things change.

Unfortunately, I think the vast majority of PCs are leased by the business world and this stuff wouldn't affect the majority of their users. So they can pretty much put out whatever they want and as long as it doesn't affect business software, they won't even see a dent in their pocketbooks.

[ROF]

DRM doesn't effect me at home or at work. It may limit what I can do with the content of media I purchase but those limits have never allowed me to not use the material as it was intended in the first place. I buy media with a license to the use the content. DRM doesn't effect that.

[somebodeez]

Well I could be mistaken but my understanding of this whole Vista/Digital Restrictions Management thing is that if Vista doesn't "approve" of what software I want to install on MY PC, I wouldn't be able to install it or use it??
That it will decide what I watch/listen to on MY PC and not me??

Sorry industry people but I fully intend to remain in control of MY PC.
I know you don't like it but you'll just have to accept it anyway. :P