I do not, in any capacity, speak for Apple. But...
Apple even discussed the pricing and said that if the Clipper/Skipjack chip could be sold to them for less than $30, they could "design it into every Mac."
Based on long experience with Macs and Mac software (system and otherwise), I think this is highly unlikely. 1. Apple has a history of following the 'software only' approach in general. 2. Apple loudly and often touts compatability across its entire line. 3. 3rd party Mac developers have little incentive to write software with mass appeal (e.g., communications software) but limited applicability (because of hardware requirements). 4. If the software isn't pre-installed in your system, then unless it comes from Microsoft, such a 'questionable' standard is probably avoidable. 5. Therefore, for a standard to emerge on the Mac... 1) Apple would have to begin producing machines that contained this chip; 2) Apple would have to produce special system software, explicitly for this class of machines, that used this chip; 3) Apple would have to produce compelling end-user communications software that used clipper services on this class of machines and either didn't run at all on earlier hardware, or didn't use clipper technology. It is unlikely that a 3rd party would do it, or have any impact if it did. But Apples history is scalable software that runs on every machine (ala QuickTime). If Apple wanted to introduce privacy enhancement technology in its system, it seems economically and historically more probable that it would simply license RSA/DES/etc technology and roll in a software only service. This is my opinion, based solely on my nine years of experience as Macintosh developer. To paraphrase Columbo: "It's my experience, sir, that people rarely do things they don't *usually* do." ...which may sound obvious, but then you *saw* the killer do it in the first 10 minutes... Scott Collins | "Few people realize what tremendous power there | is in one of these things." -- Willy Wonka ......................|................................................ BUSINESS. voice:408.862.0540 fax:974.6094 collins@newton.apple.com Apple Computer, Inc. 1 Infinite Loop, MS 301-2C Cupertino, CA 95014 ....................................................................... PERSONAL. voice/fax:408.257.1746 1024:669687 catalyst@netcom.com
Scott Collins has commented at length on my first post on this, which is good. Let me note again that I was communicating pretty much exactly what I heard, and labelled my own speculations as just that. In particular, I was not claiming the decision has been made, or that it could reasonably be implemented. Anyway, some comments on Scott's points:
Based on long experience with Macs and Mac software (system and otherwise), I think this is highly unlikely.
1. Apple has a history of following the 'software only' approach in general.
2. Apple loudly and often touts compatability across its entire line.
The new "audio-visual" Macs (660av and 840av) have DSP hardware inside and software for speech recognition (part of PlainTalk, I understand) which is specific to these machines. The speech synthesis software will run on all (or most?) machines, as the DSP is not used, but the speech recognition only runs on the av machines (or properly DSP-equipped machines, presumably). This suggests the "software only" and "compatibility across its entire line" are things of the past. (BTW, as we Mac users all know, minor incompatibilities have often existed, as with virtual memory not running on all platforms--how could it have?--and the differences in FPUs, screens, etc.)
3. 3rd party Mac developers have little incentive to write software with mass appeal (e.g., communications software) but limited applicability (because of hardware requirements).
My speculation would be that the Clipper/Skipjack/Capstone deal, if it is happening at all, is some time off. Perhaps for a phone version of the av Macs (there had been speculation that Apple was planning to use the on-board DSP hardware for a modem tool, similar to what NeXT has done with its hardware).
5. Therefore, for a standard to emerge on the Mac... 1) Apple would have to begin producing machines that contained this chip; 2) Apple would have to produce special system software, explicitly for this class of machines, that used this chip; 3) Apple would have to produce compelling end-user communications software that used clipper services on this class of machines and either didn't run at all on earlier hardware, or didn't use clipper technology.
#1 and #2 are already satisfied with the new generation of av Macs, as noted above. #3 may or may not occur. My speculation is that Apple will not go it alone, but may be in the early negotiation phases of such a deal (perhaps an encrypted phone conferencing system, or other phone use of the av Macs, which the Feds would have some interest in, a la the whole Clipper thing). I would never urge anyone to boycott Apple products on such a flimsy basis as this story I heard from an Apple guy. I just wanted to let the Cypherpunks know what I heard; it might make later developments more understandable. Anyone who wants a Mac but instead buys Windows because of this rumor deserves what he gets. -Tim -- .......................................................................... Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay@netcom.com | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero 408-688-5409 | knowledge, reputations, information markets, W.A.S.T.E.: Aptos, CA | black markets, collapse of governments. Higher Power: 2^756839 | Public Key: PGP and MailSafe available. Note: I put time and money into writing this posting. I hope you enjoy it.
I agree 100% with what Scott had to say about Apple's past history. My own experience as a Mac owner and developer bears him out. However, Apple *does* have a set of software to allow digital signatures for documents and mail- AOCE. 1. Apple has a history of releasing software which *can* take advantage of special hardware available on newer machines (i.e. Color QuickDraw, the Sound Manager, which allows recording sounds directly on machines with built-in mikes), but which is still backwards-compatible. 2. AOCE already includes RSA for digital signatures; using the Component Manager, it could conceivably take advantage of a Capstone/Clipper ASIC on the motherboard or on an expansion card (or a PCMCIA slot, or whatever.) 3. Third-party developers have little reward in developing an API for something like digital signatures, but there are great rewards in writing software which supports Apple's API. Look at the ongoing competition between video codecs for an example. Theorem A: just because Apple _can_ do something is no reason to think they _will_, especially when the benefits are questionable (as they certainly are here!) Theorem B: Even *if* (and I stress that one little word) Apple put a Capstone into every Macintosh, that doesn't mean *you* have to use it. Since AOCE supports plug-in encryption & signature technology, you can roll your own (and I see a good market in doing so.) While the proof of both of the above must be left to future readers, I'm not too concerned. A meta-note: let's keep all the FSF wrangling someplace else. It's really not appropriate here. -Paul -- Paul Robichaux, KD4JZG | "Change the world for a better tomorrow. But perobich@ingr.com | watch your ass today." - aaron@halcyon.com Intergraph Federal Systems | Be a cryptography user- ask me how.
participants (3)
-
collins＠newton.apple.com -
paul＠poboy.b17c.ingr.com -
tcmay＠netcom.com