[ISN] Terror attacks usher in copy controlled hardware

From: InfoSec News (isnat_private)
Date: Wed Sep 19 2001 - 11:38:14 PDT

  • Next message: InfoSec News: "RE: [ISN] New York Red Cross Needs Tech assistance!"

    By Andrew Orlowski in San Francisco
    Posted: 18/09/2001 at 20:39 GMT
    Senator Hollings' SSSCA legislation - which makes copy-controlled
    hardware mandatory (and circumventing it illegal) - has received
    remarkably little attention since it was revealed ten days ago. No
    petitions, no EFF Alert (as yet), and very little public uproar.
    But according to Andre Hedrick, who publicly fought attempts to put
    CPRM copy controls into the storage format, the Security Systems
    Standards and Certification Act provides a perfect platform for the
    anti-encryption lobby.
    He rates the legislation's chance of success as "very high", and even
    higher after the terrorist atrocities last week.
    And CPRM, which after the furore earlier this year sidelined for use
    in 'removable' media (CF, MMC) only, fits the bill perfectly.
    Hedrick is outraged that the PC industry will foot the bill for
    protecting Hollywood's assets:
    "When you place your wares out in an insecure environment, you must
    expect losses. "The last time I checked, when you need a bodyguard,
    you have to pay somebody to protect you. They're asking the storage
    industry to pay," he says.
    Hedrick is concerned that the "Digital Security" aspects of the
    legislation will make honest people criminals, he says, and criminals
    untouchable. As it stands, the Hollings Bill puts media forensics
    beyond the law. "Justice can not be served as one has to break the law
    to protect the law," he told us.
    Microsoft succeeded in having the media key unique identifier ratified
    by the T.13 ATA committee, and although its main usefulness to the
    Beast is in providing a seed for Windows Product Activation, it also
    contributes a seed for Microsoft's version of CPRM, he says.
    So where are the lobbyists?
    Jonathan Potter of the Digital Media Association told us he thought
    the SSSCA has "no chance" of becoming law.
    Unofficially we gather that the Electronic Frontier Foundation views
    the SSSCA as a distraction from the main business in hand: the DMCA.
    Stanton McCandish told us today that a position paper was in fact
    being prepared. Given the hysteria over wiretapping a bill with
    'Security' stamped all over looks set to be received more favourably.
    It's time to fight the unthinkable.
    ISN is currently hosted by Attrition.org
    To unsubscribe email majordomoat_private with 'unsubscribe isn' in the BODY
    of the mail.

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Wed Sep 19 2001 - 14:23:28 PDT