[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:0.168 / U:0.288 seconds]
©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site