Selective device jamming - Microsoft Patent

[bludex]

Seems another afront against web freedom possibly is beginning to be orchestrated. After the "Trusted Computing" initiative now this. This could apply to virtual territory as well. Internet zones: "Access forbidden. Your computer will shut down in 10 seconds after trespassing this link. The incident will be reported to authorities. Always for your best, your Supervisormode."

http://www.wired.com/politics/securi...tymatters_0626
I've Seen the Future, and It Has a Kill Switch

Bruce Schneier http://www.wired.com/images/icon_email.gif 06.26.08

It used to be that just the entertainment industries wanted to control your computers -- and televisions and iPods and everything else -- to ensure that you didn't violate any copyright rules. But now everyone else wants to get their hooks into your gear.
OnStar will soon include the ability for the police to shut off your engine remotely. Buses are getting the same capability, in case terrorists want to re-enact the movie Speed. The Pentagon wants a kill switch installed on airplanes, and is worried about potential enemies installing kill switches on their own equipment.
Microsoft is doing some of the most creative thinking along these lines, with something it's calling "Digital Manners Policies." According to its patent application, DMP-enabled devices would accept broadcast "orders" limiting capabilities. Cellphones could be remotely set to vibrate mode in restaurants and concert halls, and be turned off on airplanes and in hospitals. Cameras could be prohibited from taking pictures in locker rooms and museums, and recording equipment could be disabled in theaters. Professors finally could prevent students from texting one another during class.
The possibilities are endless, and very dangerous. Making this work involves building a nearly flawless hierarchical system of authority. That's a difficult security problem even in its simplest form. Distributing that system among a variety of different devices -- computers, phones, PDAs, cameras, recorders -- with different firmware and manufacturers, is even more difficult. Not to mention delegating different levels of authority to various agencies, enterprises, industries and individuals, and then enforcing the necessary safeguards.
Once we go down this path -- giving one device authority over other devices -- the security problems start piling up. Who has the authority to limit functionality of my devices, and how do they get that authority? What prevents them from abusing that power? Do I get the ability to override their limitations? In what circumstances, and how? Can they override my override? [...]

[Bender]

a new industry will rise, offering "limitations removal"

[bludex]

a new industry will rise, offering "limitations removal"

Hopefully. And hopefull it will not be illegal.
It suggests it'll be wise to keep your old mainboards in a EMP-secured Faraday shielded box, just in case.

[draggar]

So many available domains just from the OP...

IMO this whole idea while displayed with great intentions have a huge potential for abuse. Imagine a hacker gaining the ability to stop other people's cars? Carjacking will go though the roof!

[HarveyJ]

Yet another reason why computerized EVERYTHING is NOT a good idea.

Come to think of it, for any serious digital device other than a phone, why the hell would you want one that's got wireless connectivity? That's just opening it up for a raping.
How LAZY do you have to be to not hook up a USB cable to, or take the SD card out of, a camera or music player?
As for phones... well, get yourself a PDAphone. Then with a little bit of time and research, you'll get to be the guy shutting down other people's cars