Intel is building anti-theft technology into hardware in a bid to make life harder for laptop thieves. The chip giant is incorporating anti-theft technology into laptops and network chip sets, and partnering with developers and hardware OEMs to deliver enhanced anti-theft technology. By placing crypto keys in hardware the …
I'd rather have a laptop stolen from me than allow a third party to disable it remotely when they feel like it.
Anti-theft? Sounds more like anti-user. Do something with your machine that Intel does not approve of - get it bricked.
The only useful application I see is for the MOD and HMRC - as they like to have their laptops left on trains/airplanes etc.
... the technology is turned on by default!
Many laptops (including those lost by HM Govt) have supported various hardware security features for years, but they are never turned on!
So what about the hard drive data? Is it encrypted? Whilst the loss of a laptop is annoying, it's nowhere near as bad as the data that is lost on the drive when it can just be removed and read in another machine!
This is just a gimmick for Admins with a god complex Or
So this is more about data protection and revenge. The laptops are likely not to be recovered just broken up into spare parts and sold or trashed. Or is it more about hardware vendors wanting to sell more hardware that will be less likely to be reused when OS bloat makes them too slow/obsolete?
Nothing like a virus infested (McAfee actually deleted svchost.exe on me one time), self-destructive (PointSec disk encryption blew up and wiped my hard drives somehow), pre-crippled (see the article yesterday) hardware.
You can still buy AMD laptops right?
Disk encryption, IMO, is a necessary evil, but for some reason the whole self-bricking deal sounds like a bad idea.
Why not just hand out stickers?
IN THEORY, could this possibly prevent people from being anonymous?. e.g. a Word document or text file could have the chip's anti-theft ID embedded in the metadata (or something)
This could potentially identify the computer that was used to make the document. Whilst this might help to identify people stealing company data, it would also hamper whistle-blowing.
Part of the problem is that I just don't trust Intel. They have been doing something fairly cunty - selling Gateway computers & asking people to buy scratchcards if they want 'extra features' (already in the chip) 'unlocked' : http://www.crunchgear.com/2010/09/19/intel-selling-scratch-off-upgrade-cars-to-unlock-processor-power/
For the same reasons that some of the folks have stated, a lot of organizations I have come in contact with bristle at the idea of any sort of phone home. They simply do not like control or even reporting to be external. Can you blame them? (See the recent McAfee DAT screwup) If the code is comprimised, like this ever happens, then an organization could be seriously inconvenienced if the attacker could ennumerate enough machines...or the right ones.
Just a random speculation, but I wonder if this is a first step before they think about reducing prices and start licensing their processors? Don't pay yearly maintenance? Brick.
This is, I suspect, more about enforcing software licenses. The theft angle is just decoration -- nobody in their right minds would carry a laptop full of sensitive data around (and increasingly its pointless to carry a laptop around -- you pull it in as you need it).
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022