安全与隐私boingboing.net编辑精选
Lockdown：即将到来的通用计算之战（2012）
Lockdown – The coming war on general-purpose computing (2012)
2012 — 2019，它一次次回到首页
黑点是上首页（≥ 50 分）的那次投稿，空心点是没冲上去的投稿，点越大分数越高。
导读
这是 Cory Doctorow 2012 年发表的著名长文（源自他在 Chaos Communication Congress 的演讲）：围绕版权执法与 DRM 的争斗，本质上正在演变为一场针对通用计算的战争——要管制复制，就不得不管制计算机本身；可信计算、封闭设备和强制管控会逐步剥夺用户对自己机器的控制权。
为什么经久不衰：它提前十多年描绘了 DRM、锁定 bootloader、应用商店审查和平台控制如何一步步侵蚀通用计算，每次重读都更像预言而非危言。
HN 评论精选
以 WannaCry 为例警告：以安全为名的管制会把通用计算机变成威权控制工具，攻击频发反而说明自由尚存。
在 WannaCry 事件的背景下，这篇文章和 Stallman 的《阅读的权利》尤其切题——毫无疑问，会有很多威权倾向的人认为，计算机（甚至编程本身）应该被锁死、被加强管制，以阻止这类攻击。某种意义上，我反而从黑客攻击、破解、泄露等事件持续发生中得到安慰——它们说明社会里还残存着一些自由。“想象一个没有犯罪的世界”是一些人常说的话，但如果你真的去想象，会发现那基本就是奥威尔《1984》的世界：没有犯罪，是因为不再有思想和行动的自由；一切都处于某个中央权威的控制之下。这不止关乎计算机，尽管计算机会是其中很大一部分；这实际上是一场针对自由的总体战争。
userbinator查看英文原文
This and Stallman's "Right to Read" (posted yesterday at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14332257 ) are particularly relevant given the whole WannaCry situation --- no doubt there will be plenty of authoritarian-minded thinking computers (and maybe even programming them) should be locked-down/regulated more, to stop such attacks. In some sense, I rather take solace in the fact that hacks, attacks, cracks, leaks, etc. are continuing to happen regularly --- they are a sign that there is still some freedom left in society. "Imagine a world without crime" is a somewhat common phrase used by some, and if you actually do, you will realise that it would pretty much be the world of Orwell's 1984: there is no crime because there is no more freedom of thought nor action; everything has become under the control of some central authority. This goes beyond computers, although they will be a large part of it; it's really a general war on freedom.
全文最精辟的一句：嵌入我们身体与生活的计算机，不应向我们隐瞒秘密或阻止我们终止违背自身利益的进程。
我总喜欢从这类长文里挑出一两句最有用的。我选这句：“所以当我坐进一辆汽车——一台我把身体放进去的计算机——戴着我的助听器——一台我放进身体里的计算机——我想知道，这些技术不是被设计来对我保守秘密的，也不是用来阻止我终止那些违背我利益的进程的。”确实如此。
daoubt查看英文原文
I always like to try to pick out the single most useful sentence or two from long essays like this. Here's my go: "So when I get into a car—a computer that I put my body into—with my hearing aid—a computer I put inside my body—I want to know that these technologies are not designed to keep secrets from me, or to prevent me from terminating processes on them that work against my interests." Indeed.
值得反复重读，但五年后对文中“我们还没输”的结尾不再有信心。
这篇文章永远、永远值得重读。不过五年过去，我已经不确定结尾所说的“我们还没有输”是否还成立。
eponeponepon查看英文原文
This always, always rewards a re-read. Five years down the line, though, and I'm no longer sure that "We haven't lost yet," as the closing paragraph puts it.
反驳式观点：通用计算并未消亡且更便宜，锁定一直存在，只是“球门”随市场和用户结构移动了。
我喜欢这篇文章，但它没意识到球门并不是固定不动的。通用计算依然健在，而且比以往更便宜，花大约 50 美元零件就能拼出一台相当于 PC/AT 的机器。Cory 忽略的是：我们当年造 CP/M 机器和 IBM PC 兼容机时，就已经有大量被锁死的计算机，让别人靠你使用它们赚钱。计算机变强了，卖给你的机器能力超过当年那些已被证明能榨取价值的机器，所以人们继续榨取。当这种榨取被绕过时，他们就和硬件、软件厂商合作夺回上风。球门移动了。另外，过去“个人电脑”市场的主力，是那些对计算机本身比对它能跑的软件更着迷的人；厂商努力迎合的是工具使用者……这类人比喜欢计算机的极客多得多。
ChuckMcM查看英文原文
I like the essay but it fails to realize the goal posts are not fixed on the field. General purpose computing is alive and well and cheaper than ever, you can build the equivalent of a PC/AT for about $50 in parts. What Cory misses is that when we were building CP/M machines and IBM PC clones, there already was a big pile of computers that were locked down so that somebody else could make money off of you using them. I went to school at a time when you were allocated a fixed number of kilocoreseconds (kilowords of core you could occupy on the big computer charged on a per second rate) and I had my kit Z80 system and felt very superior. Computers got more powerful and now the one that was sold to you has the more than the capabilities than the one where it was already proven you could extract value for using it, so people continue to extract that value. And when their extraction is sidestepped, they work with computer makers and software makers to regain the upper hand. The goal posts moved. What has also happened is that the backbone of what used to be the "personal computer" market was people who were more fascinated with the computers themselves than with the software they might run on them. The manufacturers worked to appeal to the tool users, the architects, engineers, and others who understood the value of computation for their job and so they were willing to invest for the right tools. There are a lot more of those people then nerds who like computers. The goal posts moved. Today's "computer" market is not really about computers, its about a platform for consuming digital products. Whether it is entertainment, or navigation, or gaming. That you could run a compiler on that thing and make new programs that it could run is nearly incidental (and certainly insignificant) to the market who buys it. The goal posts moved. We have reached the point where general purpose computers are these $35 and $50 things for people interested in computers and for no one else. Even when people try to push them that way. I don't believe there is an assault on general purpose computers, what is happening is that thing you called a computer before is what back in the day we called a TV and a telephone and a radio and a record player, except all in one package that runs all day in your pocket. It has a computer in it but it isn't a computer in the original sense of general purpose computing. There are lots of general purpose computers, and there are now FPGAs that are easily loaded with general purpose computation. You just can't run gcc on your TV.
历次讨论
同类还值得读
非法素数
Illegal prime
维基百科条目，介绍“非法素数”：某些素数之所以被称为“非法”，是因为它们经特定编码后，恰好对应一段被法律禁止传播的数据——最著名的是 DVD 解密程序 DeCSS 的代码，有人把…
安全与隐私上首页 5 次 · 2010–2021en.wikipedia.org编辑精选关于 /dev/urandom 的常见误区
Myths about /dev/urandom
（Thomas Hühn 撰写，2014 年首发并持续更新）逐条反驳关于 /dev/urandom 的常见误解：它与 /dev/random 使用的是同一个 CSPRNG，一旦完…
安全与隐私上首页 5 次 · 2014–20202uo.de编辑精选AES 高级加密标准火柴人图解
A Stick Figure Guide to the Advanced Encryption Standard (AES)
一篇用火柴人漫画形式讲解 AES（高级加密标准）算法的经典科普文章。
安全与隐私上首页 5 次 · 2009–2022moserware.com编辑精选指纹是用户名，不是密码
Fingerprints are Usernames, not Passwords
作者（eCryptfs 维护者、Ubuntu 安全工程师）认为指纹等生物特征是公开、不可更改的标识，应视作用户名而非密码，不能当作秘密凭据用于认证。
安全与隐私上首页 4 次 · 2013–2017blog.dustinkirkland.comHTTPS 连接的最初几毫秒（2009）
The First Few Milliseconds of an HTTPS Connection (2009)
逐毫秒拆解一次 HTTPS 连接建立时发生了什么，重点讲 TLS 握手、证书验证、RSA 签名与密钥协商等机制，面向不熟悉该领域的读者。
安全与隐私上首页 4 次 · 2009–2020moserware.com编辑精选