Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 19th Sep 2010 20:32 UTC, submitted by sawboss
Permalink for comment 441668
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 23:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:01 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:30 UTC, submitted by JRepin
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 22:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 15:53 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2009-08-05
I have a hard time figuring out if I think this is a kinda good idea, or if I hate it with a passion. If there's no hidden costs (except the upgrade ending up being more expensive than having bought a faster CPU to begin with) to the end user, it could be OK...
As for crackability, this could be done pretty much 100% secure. There's already (public-key?) cryptographic verification in the CPUs for accepting microcode, and we know Intel has the capability of doing per-CPU unique numbers (remember the P3 days?).