[76804] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
MS responds to Gutmann's Vista paper
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (=?UTF-8?B?SXZhbiBLcnN0acSH?=)
Sat Jan 20 23:28:18 2007
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2007 19:43:40 -0500
From: =?UTF-8?B?SXZhbiBLcnN0acSH?= <krstic@solarsail.hcs.harvard.edu>
To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
Aside from admitting to increased CPU utilization, which seemed pretty
incontestable anyway, they're disputing [0] many of the points made in
the original paper [1]. Ignoring the hand-wavy arguments, I find most
interesting their claims that a) there will be no move away from unified
drivers, b) that HFS doesn't depend on, and therefore won't impact, open
source drivers, and c) that video quality is degraded only for specific
premium content rather than globally. Assuming all three are true, this
would downgrade the Vista content protection system from
"cataclysmically braindead" to merely "extremely braindead" -- a welcome
downgrade, given all of Peter's other points.
[0]
http://windowsvistablog.com/blogs/windowsvista/archive/2007/01/20/windows-vista-content-protection-twenty-questions-and-answers.aspx
[1] http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.html
--
Ivan Krstić <krstic@solarsail.hcs.harvard.edu> | GPG: 0x147C722D
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo@metzdowd.com
