Xref: utzoo comp.arch:7860 comp.edu:1874 comp.misc:4720
Path: utzoo!attcan!lsuc!maccs!nusip
From: nusip@maccs.McMaster.CA (Mike Borza)
Newsgroups: comp.arch,comp.edu,comp.misc
Subject: Re: built-in security features
Keywords: computer security, network security
Message-ID: <1804@maccs.McMaster.CA>
Date: 17 Jan 89 04:54:48 GMT
References: <8846@nsc.nsc.com> <5995@polya.Stanford.EDU>
Reply-To: nusip@maccs.UUCP (Mike Borza)
Organization: McMaster U., Hamilton, Ont., Can.
Lines: 19

In article <5995@polya.Stanford.EDU> andy@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (Andy Freeman) writes:
>In article <8846@nsc.nsc.com> roger@nsc.nsc.com (Roger Thompson) writes:
>
>The world does change.  Some time before the IBM-PC was introduced,
>"someone" suggested anti- software piracy features to Intel.  The
>basic idea was to have dealers trap-door encrypt code, using a

While the details are somewhat hazy now, I believe that HP did sell
some systems with a similar scheme, whereby a system call or dedicated
read-only memory location was available to software to verify that the
software was running on a CPU for which it was licensed.  As I recall,
the scheme was quickly abandoned for a variety of reasons, not least
of which was the potential liability if a legally-licensed user had to
replace the CPU.  I think the scheme was described in an HP Journal
article (c. 1982) describing the design of the system software and
hardware (series 200?).

mike borza <nusip@maccs.uucp>
....it's all so hazy now....