Talk:Trusted Platform Module
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
this article says nothing about what this "module" is supposed to do. - --Sprafa 19:00, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
this article also reads like a load of vague marketing speak, and mentions nothing of the controversy of "trusted" computing, or the hardware aspects of palladium, or the potential downside for users. *major* rewrite needed by someone with more knowledge on the subject (and preferably not someone from the marketing department of some company trying to push the technology onto people) Xmoogle 21:19, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
- The "How it works" section was added just a few days ago by a new editor, whose sole contribution was that section. I've removed it entirely, because you're right, it sounds like marketing material. Also, it was factually incorrect for the most part, since a TPM can't necessarily prevent spyware from being installed on modern operating systems.... it's just a hardware-based cryptographic provider. As for the issue of contraversy around trusted computing, you'll find that subject well-covered in the trusted computing article... any criticism or contraversy put here should be about the chip itself, not about the bigger conceptual issues of TC. Warrens 21:32, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Capitalisation
Shouldn't the title of the article be capitalised as "Trusted Platform Module"? It is referred to as such in the first line, after all. --Paul1337 19:07, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
As it was already mentioned, this article reads like marketing crap. Especially the "Uses" section is a serious violation of the NPOV ("This is highly desirable..." "Pushing the security down to the hardware level in conjunction with software is a much better solution...") --84.143.223.74 07:39, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
- i've modified the 'Uses' section , i hope the article is NPOV enough now . fell free to re-add the NPOV tag if you disagree , and in , that case , please explain why. Dbiagioli 08:19, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
I really don't think this adheres to NPOV. Only negative examples are given in 'uses', rather then strictly sticking to the capabilities of the hardware being discussed.
- what are the "negative examples" ? the tripwire tool does the same thing the enforcer does, and people are actually buying tripwire ... Dbiagioli 20:13, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
