[Am-info] I Told You So

[Fred A. Miller]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

I Told You So=20
Alas, a Couple of Bob's Dire Predictions Have Come True=20

By Robert X. Cringely=20


Just over three years ago I wrote a column titled "Cooking the Books: How=
=20
Clever Accounting Techniques are Used to Make Internet Millionaires." It=20
explained how telecom companies were using accounting tricks to create=20
revenue where there really was none. Take another look at the column (it'=
s=20
among the links on the "I Like It" page), and think of Worldcom with its=20
recently revealed $3.7 billion in hidden expenses. Then last August, I wr=
ote=20
a column titled "The Death of TCP/IP: Why the Age of Internet Innocence i=
s=20
Over." Take a look at that column, too, and think about Microsoft's=20
just-revealed project called Palladium.=20

The end is near.=20

Sometimes I'd rather be wrong, but it's a no-brainer to guess that=20
accountancy, which has apparently become something of an art form or=20
interpretive dance, could have a dark side. And you'll never lose money=20
betting for Microsoft and against Microsoft's competitors and customers.=20

Let's concentrate on the Microsoft story. Last August, I wrote of a rumor=
 that=20
Microsoft wanted to replace TCP/IP with a proprietary protocol -- a proto=
col=20
owned by Microsoft -- that it would tout as being more secure. Actually, =
the=20
new protocol would likely be TCP/IP with some of the reserved fields used=
 as=20
pointers to proprietary extensions, quite similar to Vines IP, if you=20
remember that product from Banyan Systems. I called it TCP/MS in the colu=
mn.=20
How do you push for the acceptance of such a protocol? First, make the ol=
d=20
one unworkable by placing millions of exploitable TCP/IP stacks out on th=
e=20
Net, ready-to-use by any teenage sociopath. When the Net slows or crashes=
,=20
the blame would not be assigned to Microsoft. Then ship the new protocol =
with=20
every new copy of Windows, and install it with every Windows Update over =
the=20
Internet. Zero to 100 million copies could happen in less than a year.=20

This week, Microsoft announced Palladium through an exclusive story in=20
Newsweek written by Steven Levy, who ought to have known better. Palladiu=
m is=20
the code name for a Microsoft project to make all Internet communication=20
safer by essentially pasting a digital certificate on every application,=20
message, byte, and machine on the Net, then encrypting the data EVEN INSI=
DE=20
YOUR COMPUTER PROCESSOR. Palladium compatible hardware (presumably chipse=
ts=20
and motherboards) will come from both AMD and Intel, and the software wil=
l,=20
of course, come from Microsoft. That software is what I had dubbed TCP/MS=
=2E=20

The point of all this is simple. It may actually make the Internet somewh=
at=20
safer. But the real purpose of this stuff, I fear, is to take technology=20
owned by nobody (TCP/IP) and replace it with technology owned by Redmond.=
=20
That's taking the Internet and turning it into MSN. Oh, and we'll all hav=
e to=20
buy new computers.=20

This is diabolical. If Microsoft is successful, Palladium will give Bill =
Gates=20
a piece of every transaction of any type while at the same time marginali=
zing=20
the work of any competitor who doesn't choose to be Palladium-compliant. =
So=20
much for Linux and Open Source, but it goes even further than that. So mu=
ch=20
for Apple and the Macintosh. It's a militarized network architecture only=
=20
Dick Cheney could love.=20

Ironically, Microsoft says they will reveal Palladium's source code, whic=
h is=20
little more than a head feint toward the Open Source movement. Nobody at=20
Microsoft is saying anything about giving the ownership of that source co=
de=20
away or of allowing just anyone to change it.=20

Under Palladium as I understand it, the Internet goes from being ours to =
being=20
theirs. The very data on your hard drive ceases to be yours because it co=
uld=20
self-destruct at any time. We'll end up paying rent to use our own data!=20

Can you tell I think this is a bad idea?=20

What bothers me the most about it is not just that we are being sold a bi=
ll of=20
goods by the very outfit responsible for making possible most current=20
Internet security problems. "The world is a fearful place (because we all=
owed=20
it to be by introducing vulnerable designs followed by clueless security=20
initiatives) so let us fix it for you." Yeah, right. Yet Palladium has a =
very=20
real chance of succeeding.=20

How long until only code signed by Microsoft will be allowed to run on th=
e=20
platform? It seems that Microsoft is trying to implement a system that wi=
ll=20
enable them, once and for all, to charge game console-like royalties to=20
software developers.=20

But how will this stop the "I just e-mailed you a virus" problem? How doe=
s=20
this stop my personal information being sucked out of my PC using cookies=
? It=20
won't. Solving those particular problems is not Palladium's real purpose,=
=20
which is to increase Microsoft's market share. It is a marketing concept =
that=20
will be sold as the solution to a problem. It won't really work.=20

Let's understand here that not all Microsoft products are bad and many ar=
e=20
very good. Those products serve real customer needs and do so with genuin=
e=20
purpose, not marketing artifice. But Palladium isn't that way at all. Thi=
s is=20
NOT about making things better for the user. This is about removing the=20
ability for the end user to make decisions about how his or her computer=20
functions. It is an effort by Microsoft to take literal ownership of Inte=
rnet=20
technology, Microsoft's "embrace and extend" strategy applied for the Nth=
=20
time, though on a grander scale than we've ever seen before. While there =
is=20
some doubt that the PC will survive a decade from now as a product catego=
ry,=20
nobody is suggesting the Internet will do anything but grow and grow over=
=20
that time. Palladium assures that whatever hardware is running on the net=
work=20
of 10 years from now, it will be generating revenue for Microsoft. There =
is=20
nothing wrong with Microsoft having a survival strategy, but plenty wrong=
=20
with presenting it as some big favor they are doing for us and for the wo=
rld.=20

What's saddest about this story is that it could be positive. The world i=
s a=20
dangerous place and finding ways to make people responsible for what they=
 do=20
on the Net is probably good, not bad. I just don't think we have the righ=
t=20
people on the job.=20


http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20020627.html

- --=20
"...Linux, MS-DOS, and Windows 2000 (also known as the Good, the Bad, and
the Ugly)."
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iEYEARECAAYFAj0dPn0ACgkQeNJ3p8sZ/uvbzQCbBPV82sC8fWKtDJw0nN4X69nY
S5YAoJpK9dJkXadWMdgRs+eZRa5JKnts
=3DWB0a
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----