←back to thread

The Dangers of Microsoft Pluton

(gabrielsieben.tech)
733 points gjsman-1000 | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
Gh0stRAT ◴[] No.32235028[source]
I'm completely missing how his example of a Word document that can only be opened by approved users on approved hardware within the corporation is supposed to be a bad thing.

Honestly, that sounds pretty fantastic. I've been using 3rd party tools/extensions to do this sort of thing in corporate and government environments for years, but having the attestation go all the way down to the hardware level is a big value-add, especially with so much ransomware/spyware/extortion/espionage going on these days.

Can someone please explain to me how the author might see this level of security as a bad thing?

replies(18): >>32235120 #>>32235149 #>>32235164 #>>32235474 #>>32235546 #>>32235795 #>>32235875 #>>32236359 #>>32236639 #>>32236668 #>>32236673 #>>32236797 #>>32236864 #>>32237450 #>>32237580 #>>32238544 #>>32238583 #>>32240740 #
BiteCode_dev ◴[] No.32235149[source]
The capacity for abuse is huge, way beyong the potential benefits.

From the USA, we get news of banned book in some states. When I read that, my head goes back to my european history, and I reach the Godwin point very quickly.

Those kind of people will abuse such system to prevent things to be shared.

It will be used for putting DRM on everything and create a more and more closed web.

It will be used by corporations and govs to prevent wisthleblowers and journalists to do their job. Or to prevent employees to get evidences of mistreatments in case they need to sue.

Because if you look at it, it's basically just a system for information control. And bad actors love that.

And of course it will be "for security reasons".

Trusting people with a terrible track record to not abuse a massive power in the future, espacially one that can be scaled up with the push of a button once the infrastructure is in place, is not a good bet.

replies(5): >>32235233 #>>32235313 #>>32235723 #>>32236892 #>>32238508 #
dx034 ◴[] No.32236892[source]
> From the USA, we get news of banned book in some states. When I read that, my head goes back to my european history, and I reach the Godwin point very quickly.

Books are not banned, just not used in the classroom anymore. While the reasons for it may be wrong, it's something that happens constantly all over the world. No one prevents children or adults to read those books at home. Banning books could mean that owning them is illegal and that just hasn't happened.

replies(3): >>32237118 #>>32241441 #>>32242481 #
acdha ◴[] No.32237118[source]
Banning their use in classrooms is lesser but still a step on that path, and the same Republicans trying to do that are not going to stop at schools after they win but will rather see that as an invigorating first step in a long campaign. For example, book sellers in Virginia are currently fighting a lawsuit against an attempt which would ban private sales:

https://www.virginiamercury.com/2022/07/06/free-speech-group...

replies(2): >>32239545 #>>32240120 #
axblount[dead post] ◴[] No.32239545[source]
1. sdlfakjslkdjfs ◴[] No.32240168[source]
OK then you agree that Amazon taking down Irreversible Damage was wrong, and that it should also be in every school library, or it's obviously a sign that the Left is going to ban books everywhere?

Removing something from a curriculum is not the same as banning it. There are many more books that are not in school libraries than there are books that are in them.

replies(1): >>32240355 #