3 ms·

This was not a security feature at all, it wasn't securing anything? This is purely a feature to allow Microsoft to resell hard drives at 3x the price.

psychphysic 4y ago
It secured a fat profit.
jchw 4y ago
Sounds like semantics to me. I think you will agree that security in computing is not just "prevent people from getting hacked" or some static goal like that, but rather security is the management of "threats" under a given "threat model". DRM, for example, is DEFINITELY a form of security software. DRM is an attempt to uphold policies around the access and/or copying of digital data such that access, distribution, etc. is controlled by said policy. Like any security software, it is meaningless if it's trivial to bypass, so it employs techniques to prevent users from modifying it, inspecting it, and otherwise bypassing its security measures. Similarly, technology that is meant to only allow licensed hardware is largely the same idea. Like SEGA's Trade Mark Security System, although instead of cryptographic signatures, they instead hinged on the threat of a lawsuit. This is still a form of security system, just with a very different model of the threat. What I am not saying is that these security measures are any good for the consumer. Obviously, these measures are very largely anti-consumer. Arguably there are some potential consumer benefits in limited cases (the most honest answer is probably anti-cheat, because most online games are frustratingly unplayable without some strong approach to dissuade cheating) but that is still not really my point. How is this security? It's simple. It's security against the threat of the end user. It upholds policies that the device vendor would like to impose on the consumer. A lock is still a security device even if you abuse it to lock somebody in a room against their will.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

psychphysic 4y ago

It secured a fat profit.

jchw 4y ago

Sounds like semantics to me. I think you will agree that security in computing is not just "prevent people from getting hacked" or some static goal like that, but rather security is the management of "threats" under a given "threat model". DRM, for example, is DEFINITELY a form of security software. DRM is an attempt to uphold policies around the access and/or copying of digital data such that access, distribution, etc. is controlled by said policy. Like any security software, it is meaningless if it's trivial to bypass, so it employs techniques to prevent users from modifying it, inspecting it, and otherwise bypassing its security measures. Similarly, technology that is meant to only allow licensed hardware is largely the same idea. Like SEGA's Trade Mark Security System, although instead of cryptographic signatures, they instead hinged on the threat of a lawsuit. This is still a form of security system, just with a very different model of the threat. What I am not saying is that these security measures are any good for the consumer. Obviously, these measures are very largely anti-consumer. Arguably there are some potential consumer benefits in limited cases (the most honest answer is probably anti-cheat, because most online games are frustratingly unplayable without some strong approach to dissuade cheating) but that is still not really my point. How is this security? It's simple. It's security against the threat of the end user. It upholds policies that the device vendor would like to impose on the consumer. A lock is still a security device even if you abuse it to lock somebody in a room against their will.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]