[lkml]   [1999]   [Oct]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: pIII Serial (or lack there-of)
    On Wed, 13 Oct 1999, Scott Marlowe wrote:

    > On Wed, 13 Oct 1999, James R Bruce wrote:
    > > Though perhaps it should be an option just because someone *might* want
    > > to use it...
    > >
    > > Intel claimed at some point that it was for identification for eCommerce
    > > and similar applications, which is a pretty stupid reason since any
    > > layer between the CPU and the network card could easily fake another
    > > serial number. Crippleware seems to be the only reasonable use in
    > > commercial apps.
    > There is one more use, in proving you own a computer if it is stolen. A
    > simple program on a bootable floppy could be used to determine the serial
    > number of any computer's CPU. If you already have your PIII numbers
    > registered somewhere, that's pretty compelling proof that this was once your
    > CPU.

    Keep in mind the same thing can (and has been done) done for your
    documents. Certain Word Processors have been known to encode it in the
    .doc file. Wich is a big reason for disabling.


    > Would it be ok for the kernel to check for a serial number enabled CPU,
    > put it up on the screen, optionally log it, then shut off the ID after that?


    <>< As a computer I find your faith in technology amusing.

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:54    [W:0.021 / U:33.320 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site