As part of their “Defective by Design” anti-DRM campaign, the FSF recently made the following claim:

Today, most of the major streaming media platforms utilize the TPM to decrypt media streams, forcefully placing the decryption out of the user’s control (from here).

This is part of an overall argument that Microsoft’s insistence that only hardware with a TPM can run Windows 11 is with the goal of aiding streaming companies in their attempt to ensure media can only be played in tightly constrained environments.

I’m going to be honest here and say that I don’t know what Microsoft’s actual motivation for requiring a TPM in Windows 11 is. I’ve been talking about TPM stuff for a long time. My job involves writing a lot of TPM code. I think having a TPM enables a number of worthwhile security features. Given the choice, I’d certainly pick a computer with a TPM. But in terms of whether it’s of sufficient value to lock out Windows 11 on hardware with no TPM that would otherwise be able to run it? I’m not sure that’s a worthwhile tradeoff.

What I can say is that the FSF’s claim is just 100% wrong, and since this seems to be the sole basis of their overall claim about Microsoft’s strategy here, the argument is pretty significantly undermined. I’m not aware of any streaming media platforms making use of TPMs in any way whatsoever. There is hardware DRM that the media companies use to restrict users, but it’s not in the TPM - it’s in the GPU.

  • utopiah@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    10 hours ago

    Neat, also got my Precursor there, but then are you saying that projects there are limited and if so how?

    • jokeyrhyme@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 hours ago

      oh, sorry, now I understand the question

      yes, devices available in CrowdSupply tend to philosophically align with my values: owner is in charge, no subscriptions, cloud connectivity is not a thing or completely optional, schematics are open, drivers are open, etc

      so they aren’t usually interfered with at a functionality or technological level

      but they’re popularity and availability are subject to interference: we’ve already had multiple governments ban or consider banning the Flipper Zero for various reasons

      and we have various media codec patents and DRM requirements that prevent truly open devices from being able to be used for popular purposes like streaming video content which pretty much guarantees that only industry-approved devices will ever gain wide distribution and popularity

      I don’t think it’s too tin-foil hat to suggest that if a truly open device did gain popularity somehow, that we’d see IP lawsuits or import restrictions or mandatory modifications (e.g. countries attempting to mandate a government-operated surveillance app preinstalled on over smartphone)