2007年12月05日 星期三 22:54
你电脑上的日期不太正确吧? On Tue, Dec 11, 2007 at 08:54:42PM +0800, YuCheng Ting wrote: > Everyone: > > 我有翻译了一点东西,好辛苦,枯燥、技术性强。有些单词和句子都不知道怎么翻 > 译,希望大家看看,给点建议。 > > English text: > > > English Web site: > > http://badvista.fsf.org/blog/analysis-of-microsofts-suicide-note-part-1 > > by oday — posted at 2007-01-09 17:59 last modified 2007-02-14 14:30 > Copyright 2006 Oliver Day, Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 License > > Oliver Day is a former corporate hacker turned student. While at eEye > Digital Security he wrote audits for the Retina Vulnerability Scanner > and was a Principal Security Consultant for @stake. He has written an > unpublished book on SAN security and found a variety of exploits in > web-based applications. He is contributing to BadVista.org a series of > posts about the presence and implications of the “content protection > scheme” in Microsoft Windows Vista. This post is the first in that series. > > > In a controversial technical analysis Peter Gutmann goes into fantastic > detail about the recently released Vista operating system and its > content protection scheme. One thing became clear to me after reading > this analysis. Vista is being marketed to content producers, not > consumers. If Windows XP was Microsoft’s attempt to embed a browser into > the operating system then Vista is the attempt to embed DRM. Digital > Rights Management technology has been applied to literally every ring of > the OS architecture. > > > Vista's target market is content producers and the underlying philosophy > of the user experience will be far different then what many consumers > expect it will be. Microsoft has attempted to plug the infamous “analog > hole” as much as is possible by forcing all data through encryption > algorithms. For those unaware of the “costs” of encryption it is > sufficiently high. Pushing HD audio and video content through > encryption/decryption routines is a tremendous strain on any system > currently available and in the near future. Even with the application of > Moore's Law a conservative estimate could place affordable and usable > systems within this new content system 5 years away. It will be > interesting to see how these restrictions will be spun by the large > marketing and PR teams since none of these innovations will benefit > consumers in any way. The job that has been handed to these PR and > marketing teams is to dress up a product designed with every restriction > a producer has asked for and make a consumer want to buy it. One of the > most quotable lines from the Gutmann analysis sums this up perfectly as, > “breaking the legs of Olympic athletes and then rating them based on how > fast they can hobble on crutches.” > > > In the past when I have delivered lectures to web application developers > I would caution them to never trust user input. Perhaps developers took > this philosophy a little too far. The entire operating system now seems > to have turned against the user. Zero tolerance drivers and regulation > code will lock the system down if any type of deviance is detected. So > called “tilt bits” will signal an attack on the system if anything is > found out of the ordinary. These changes won’t enhance user security > unfortunately as they were designed to protect only “premium content”. > Medical data, credit card numbers, and other private things that do > deserve this level of protection are completly ignored. Untrusting of > any environmental changes the system will shut down or degrade > performance in response to a perceived attack. > > > This is a marked turn from the past versions of the Microsoft operating > system. In the past one could take a hard drive from a Windows OS and > drop it into an entirely different system. The new hardware would be > detected and drivers applied on the spot. At most a single reboot would > bring the user back into a usable system. This type of resilience was > what impressed me during the early days of the new Windows architecture. > In those days Microsoft was fairly dominant but still pursuing new > customers. The new Vista scheme signals to me that they have exhausted > new customer acquisition and are now focused on milking their existing > market. > > > In the next post I will look at who benefits (Intel, Hollywood, code > obfuscation providers) and who doesn’t (consumers) and some security > issues (driver revocations for DDOS) > > > > “Some argue that the consumer gets little or negative ‘benefit’ > from this > > increase, this is false. The consumer gets premium content on their PC” > > Pete Levinthal > Software Engineering > ATI Technologies, Inc > > > This is a fair statement. Playing HD content from a Blueray or HD DVD > disk is clearly an advantage that end users would appreciate. So in the > sense that a benefit is an advantage I would say Levinthal’s statement > is accurate. However, benefit can also refer to “profit” which would > make his statement questionable. Considering that he mentions ‘negative > “benefit”‘ I think we should delve further into this connotation. Profit > is the positive difference between the amount spent and the amount > earned. So in purely mathematical terms the amount of “cost” to the end > user to play premium content must be lower then the amount gained in the > operation of HD playback for a profitable expierence. I believe it is > safe to assume what the amount gained is, HD playback. What isn’t so > clear is what the costs are. In the programmers universe cost is > generally associated with amounts of cpu cycles spent solving some > problem. Thus if a programmer writes a function for a program which > needlessly recomputes values it is considered “expensive”. An > accomplished programmer can write elegant solutions which do not incur > much cost. > > > Keeping the previous definition of “cost” in mind I think it is fitting > to look into what the premium content protection really costs a user. > From this analysis we can make a fair judgement on whether a user > profits overall from the ability to play HD content. According to the > Micosoft presentations here, here, here, and here the playback of HD > content requires no less then two rounds of encryption/decryption before > the video is sent to the display. First the video comes from the > original HD media in encrypted format and is decoded. That decoded media > is then encoded again using the AES algorithm and sent across the PCIe > bus. Once it reaches the other side of that bus it is decoded and then > sent across the HDMI interface to the display. > > > The entire process is documented here in a presentation by Microsoft: > > (picture)http://badvista.fsf.org/blog/images/Slide15.jpg > PVP-OPM > > Based on my own valuation of HD content playback I would say that the > price is either near or exceeding the gain of watching content on my PC. > Clearly the price of these computations goes down every 18 months* by > 50% according to Moore’s law. This led to my earlier prediction that an > affordable and usable system running Vista is perhaps 5 years away. > Before I close on this installment I want to give a preview of the next > piece I have lined up. This image struck me and has pervaded my thoughts > about this article. > > > Why Do It > > (picture) http://badvista.fsf.org/blog/images/Picture%201.png > > This image from a presentation delivered by Dave Marsh (Program Manager, > Windows Media Technologies) captures how Microsoft frames this problem. > Perhaps not intentional but all too apparent in this image is their end > user acting deviously and maliciously hurting Hollywood, Microsoft, and > probably America. > > * Wikipedia cites Moore as stating 12 months between the doubling of > transistors which given my previous statement would reduce the distance > of a usable and affordable system 3.3 years away. There are other > references in the article that state the chip making industry adheres to > the “doubling every 18 months”. My prediction was that of 3.5x current > capacities for an affordable system to play back HD content on a Vista PC. > > //---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > 一下是初次译文: > (译者:Yuch) > > English Web site: > > http://badvista.fsf.org/blog/analysis-of-microsofts-suicide-note-part-1 > > Oliver Day 是先前的一个学生黑客。当在eEye Digital Security时,他为Retina > Vulnerability Scanner(视网膜扫描的安全问题)写过一些审计报告,同时还是 > @Stake 的Principal Security Consultant(首席安全顾问)。他已经在SAN > (Storge Area NetWork)写过关于安全的一些未公开的书,同时建立了各种各样 > 的基于Web的应用。他在BadVista.org中写过一些列关于 Microsoft Windows > Vista“内容保护模式”(content protection scheme)中隐含的意义。这就是这些 > 系列的第一个贴子: > > > 在一次技术分析讨论中, Peter Gutmann介绍了关于最近发布的Vista操作系统和 > 它的内容保护模式中荒谬的细节。一件事在你读了这个分析之后会十分清楚: > Vista是为市场中的生产商服务的,而不是消费者。如果Windows XP是Microsoft试 > 图将浏览器嵌入到操作系统的一个过程,那么Vista就是试图嵌入DRM。数字版权管 > 理技术将会出现在OS系统构架中的每一个环节。 > > > Vista的目标市场是内容生产商,在用户经验(原则、哲学)的直接支配下,将会 > 与很多消费者期望的相差很远。Microsoft已经试图堵住声名狼藉的漏洞(analog > hole),就像所有的数据都要通过加密算法强制加密一样。为了那些没有意识到的 > 加密“花费”,他(要求的性能)十分的高。将HD的音频和视频通过加密、解密算法 > 处理在当前任何系统甚至在可预见的未来系统中,都是高耗能的。即使使用摩斯码 > (加密)的应用程序,保守估计,这样的系统(可使用、可消费的)出现都要5年 > 的时间。有趣的是,看到这些限制将会被大的购买交易和PR组所细化,虽然这些发 > 明对消费者在任何程度上而言都是没有利益的。这些PR和市场组织控制的工作将会 > 华丽地包装出一个产品,每一个限制都在上面,但是一个制造商已经在要求他们的 > 用户购买使用它。在Gutmann的分析摘要中引用的最多的一句话可以很好的表现: > “打断奥林匹克运动员的腿,然后责骂他们为什么不用拐棍支撑跑快点” > > > 在过去,当我发布一个演讲到web应用开发者的时候,我都会警告他们绝对没有让 > 使用者再编辑它。尽管开发者没有意识到这个问题中的道理。一整个操作系统现在 > 看起来都在反对使用者。零延迟驱动(Zero tolerance drivers)和规格码将会锁 > 住系统防止任何侵权操作(deviance)。所以一个被叫做“tilt bits”的操作会在系 > 统上引发一个攻击行为,在任何非常规(操作)被发现的时候。很不幸,这些改变 > 将不会加强用户安全,正如它们是设计出来只是保护“额外的内容”。体检数据,信 > 用卡号,和其它私有数据确实希望有这一层次的保护,但是它们却完全被忽略。在 > 任何环境中的不信任的操作修改这个系统(配置)时,会导致关闭机器或者降低整 > 个系统的性能,以用于处理可能的攻击。 > > 这是从Microsoft操作系统之前版本中转型的一个标志。在过去一个在Windows OS > 中的硬件驱动器,可以取下来后放到一个完全不同的操作系统中去。这个新的硬件 > 将会被探测到,同时驱动程序将会及时应用。在至多一次重新启动之后将会带给用 > 户一个可用的系统。这种回复能力是新的Windows构架在早些时候给我留下很深的 > 印象。在那些日子里Microsoft十分霸道,但是还是希望着新消费者(的加入)。 > 这个新的Vista模式给我的信号却是他们已经厌烦了新的消费者加入,而是集中精 > 力压榨他们已经占领了的市场。 > > 在下一张贴子中我将会看到谁是受益者(Intel,Hollywood,code obfuccation > providers)还有谁(消费者)不是。同时还有一些安全问题(DDOS 驱动器撤销) > > > >“一些辩论说,消费者只能从这个增长中得到一丁点利益甚至是负面利益 > (negetive benefit’), > >这是个失误。消费者将从他们自己的PC中获得额外的内容” > > Pete Levinthal > Software Engineering(软件工程师) > ATI Technologies, Inc(ATI 技术公司) > > > 这是一个公平的评论。从蓝光(Blueray)或是HD DVD中播放HD(高清)内容的优 > 势就是终端用户的增值体验。所以在这个层面上说,利益就是优势,我才说 > Levinthal的评论是正确的。但是利益也能偏向于“利润”,所以使他的评论有点值 > 得怀疑。考虑到他提及的“负面利益(negetive ‘benefit’)”,我认为我们应该深 > 刻的对此暗示进行研究。利润的确是在消耗的次数和获得的次数之间有所不同。所 > 以在纯粹的数学术语上,用在终端用户重复播放额外内容的“花费”次数肯定是较低 > 的,然后在HD重放的操作中获取的次数,却是为了有利可图。我相信,如果假设获 > 得的次数是HD重放次数的话,那么它是安全的。不明朗的问题是什么是消耗的东 > 西。在程序员的世界中,消耗与解决问题所花费的CPU周期的数量有关。一但一个 > 程序员写出一个程序的函数,需要重复计算的不必要指令,那么这就是被认为是 > “高消耗”的。一个成熟的程序员能写出高雅的程序,而不会招致额外的CPU消耗。 > > > 保持脑海中先前“消耗”的定义,我认为看一看额外内容保护消耗了用户的一些什么 > (资源)是比较适合的。从这个分析中我们可得出一个公正的评价,看一个用户能 > 否从播放HD内容的这一点上获取全部的利益。从Microsoft在这里、那里、这里、 > 那里称述的内容,重放HD内容之前需要少于两轮加密/解密的发送给屏幕。第一次 > 的视频是来自于原始HD媒介,是从加密格式中解码而来。这个解码的媒体数据然后 > 通过PIC-E总线,又再次使用AES算法加密回去。一但数据到了总线的这一边,它就 > 是解码的,然后经过HDMI接口发送到屏幕上。 > > > 这整个处理过程从Microsoft称述的文档看来如下: > > (一张图:http://badvista.fsf.org/blog/images/Slide15.jpg) > PVP-OPM > > 我自己对HD节目重放的观点就是,价格与在我自己的PC上观看节目之间,是十分相 > 关的。很明显,按照Moore定律,计算机的价格会在18个月内降低 50%。这样的 > 话,我们可以预测得到,一个购买的起并且可运行的Vista系统将会有5年之遥。在 > 我将要结束这个部分的时候,我想要给出下一部分的一点资料。这张图十分使我震 > 惊,并且贯穿这篇文章始终。 > > 我们为什么这么做? > > (一张图:http://badvista.fsf.org/blog/images/Picture%201.png) > > 这张图是Dave Marsh(Windows Media Technologies,项目经理)所称述的内容中 > 获取的,表达了Microsoft如何制定了这个问题。尽管不是故意的,但是这张图的 > 意图很明显,他们的最终用户 (their end user acting deviously and > maliciously hurting Hollywood, Microsoft, and probably America. 不知道如 > 何翻译。) > > -- > Yucheng Ting > Just A Student Now > For the Game And Freedom > > Email: yuchting at gmail.com > Phone: Always Changed And Contact Me By Email > > _______________________________________________ > zeuux-universe mailing list > zeuux-universe at zeuux.org > http://www.zeuux.org/mailman/listinfo/zeuux-universe > > ZEUUX Project - Free Software, Free Society! > http://www.zeuux.org -- http://www.fwolf.com/ Behold, the fool saith, "Put not all thine eggs in the one basket"--which is but a manner of saying, "Scatter your money and your attention;" but the wise man saith, "Put all your eggs in the one basket and--WATCH THAT BASKET." -- Mark Twain, "Pudd'nhead Wilson's Calendar" -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature Url : http://www.zeuux.org/pipermail/zeuux-universe/attachments/20071205/7708f928/attachment-0001.bin
Zeuux © 2024
京ICP备05028076号