TPM isn't capable of the outlandish claims you're making. It stores textual content in PCRs, and is extremely limited at that, not at the very least of in size.

TPM isn't capable of the outlandish claims you're making. It stores textual content in PCRs, and is extremely limited at that, not at the very least of in size. Unique IDs of a system don't require a TPM. Microsoft uses unique IDs from various hardware to bind a product key to a particular device, and has been doing that since the XP era. Intel and gfx vendors already provide secure DRM paths. TPM isn't capable of doing so. > Don't get me wrong, security devices should exist 100%. But. It should never be forced. They should be forced otherwise users would continue leaving themselves open to attack. Security has moved on from ACLs. Microsoft recognizes the need for things like VBS to protect against modern threats, which in turn requires TPM. Apple has been doing this for roughly 15 or so years now with no fanfare on consumer devices. TPM has been around on x86 since the late '00s with little-to-no fanfare.