From: Adam Back <aba@dcs.ex.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 12:10:09 -0800 (PST)
To: minow@apple.com
Subject: Re: Computer CPU chips with built-in crypto?
In-Reply-To: <v03007805aeb4208db8aa@[17.219.102.27]>
Message-ID: <199611181205.MAA00114@server.test.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



Martin Minow <minow@apple.com> writes:
> In a note to cypherpunks, Hal Finney comments on the new crypto
> initiative:
> >
> >It's also not clear what the hardware manufacturers get out of this.
> >Their sales overseas have never been blocked.  There has been no demand
> >for custom crypto hardware.  I don't see how they have been harmed by an
> >inability to ship computers with built-in encryption hardware.  Granted
> >there are some possible applications for such systems but I don't see the
> >market demand which would drive this decision.
> >
> 
> I'm not sure if I can answer this but, at last week's SF cypherpunks
> meeting, an Intel engineer asked whether there might be any interest
> in a computer chip with some sort of encryption mechanism built
> into the chip. As I understand it, this chip would process an
> encrypted instruction stream. I.e., it could not execute a program
> unless the "key" for that program was first loaded into the chip.
> 
> An interesting idea: does anyone have more information?

It is a dangerous idea.  I speculated on this on the list some time
ago.  What we don't want is a clipper CPU which is using skipjack to
decrypt the instruction stream at run-time.  It opens up all sorts of
flexibility for GAK, software copyright protection, and means that
people won't be able to see what code they are running on their own
CPU.

I think it would be a negative technology from a cypherpunks
perspective, particularly if the USG has anything to do with it.

Adam
--
print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<>
)]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0<X+d*lMLa^*lN%0]dsXx++lMlN/dsM0<J]dsJxp"|dc`