back to article Intel to take felon-foiling tech to phones, slates

Intel has confirmed that it will bring its Anti-theft Technology (AT), currently being pitched at Ultrabooks, to Atom-based smartphones and tablets. The timeframe for bringing AT to such devices is unclear, but it is definitely on the company's roadmap, said Mojy Mirashrafi, Intel's Director of Engineering, Security and Content …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
FAIL

This troglodyte says NO!

So they propose making computers that won't even BOOT unless they're connected to the Internet? That won't even let you at the BIOS? Meaning you're shafted if you're in a no-signal area?

I don't think I want one of those.

7
0
Anonymous Coward

Just paranoid...

"to get this multi billion deal from our government instead of arm based devices, you need to talk to Intel for tracking ability by our secret service."

Intel would say "no" as they ....?

What stops them? Especially outside US?

0
0
Anonymous Coward

And what...

... is to stop someone maliciously reporting a machine as being stolen, or someone hacking the C&C server and triggering a mass wipe.

Too close to the knuckle for me.

If any tech has this on it, I'm not buying it.

2
0
Coffee/keyboard

This is horrific tech, cause it can be abused far beyond what any thief could do.

If it CAN be abused, it WILL be abused... that simple

Already various government agencies are overstepping their bounds, even after the huge increase in powers the spooks got after 9/11...

If you're a political dissenter, they'll find some phony charges like they did with Assange - enough reason for them to remotely deactivate your credit card, your phone your computer and your car, naturally...

Why wait, why not put everybody into FEMA camps now, that should control theft nicely, since people can't go anywhere...

Orwell really didn't even come close to what kind of reality our children are going to wake up to... A potential dictator is always just one election or war away.

1
1
Big Brother

Re: This is horrific tech, cause it can be abused far beyond what any thief could do.

See not being an Anonymous Coward I will at least have the decency to explain why I down voted. But first I agree that if there is potential (and there is a lot of potential in this kit) for it to be abused, then there will be someone or a group of someones that will abuse it. Whether that be hacktivists(lol), government agencies or The Cyber Boogey Men we keep getting warned about

It's the political dissenter paragraph you have posted that annoyed me (hence the down vote), what phony charges are you referring to with regards to Assange?? As far as I am aware he is a foreign government has issued a warrant for his arrest to answer questions about an alleged rape, since he refused to defend himself and instead skipped country and has avoided arrest by seeking political asylum in a foreign embassy. So he has broken the law twice, without even getting onto the rape allegation. Notice that I refer to the rape as an allegation, because I am still convinced he is innocent until proven otherwise of this offence. Him running and hiding doesnt help his case any it just makes me think he something to cover up.

He is also guilty of publishing classified documents which is still classed as treasonous behaviour so that would be another crime.

I agree we live in a surveilance led sytem these days, but admit to being quite torn as to whether it is a good thing or a bad thing. On one hand if this helps lock up/stop more criminals then I am all for it and in an ideal world thats all it would be used for. It is when it is used in other ways to spy on us with no valid reason, thats when it muddies the water a little too much for my liking.

As for potential dictators, I wouldnt worry too much about the current crop of elected (lol again) officials they are too busy looking at their own tiny little world to focus on taking over the world. None of them have the balls required or enough charisma to turn people into a bunch of sheep that will believe anything they say. Now if Steve Jobs was still alive and running for governent then I would be worried as that is one man who new how to make sheep!!!

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Tony Smith

I swear if I ever read an article by Tony Smith that is both factually accurate and consists of coherent sentences then I will eat my hat.

Where is the 'rate this article' function? Did you take it away because his ratings were so appalling?

0
2

Some clarification from the Intel site is available, after all this has been some Intel stuff since '08.

"

1. You can set your device to lock from the Intel® Anti-Theft Service website and it will lockdown the next time it synchronizes with the service. Your device automatically synchronizes with the service when it is connected to internet.

2. If your device does not synchronize with the service within the "user selected" number of days, the Intel® Anti-Theft Service will lock your device. The Timer Based Lock uses a hardware based timer that prevents an unauthorized person from defeating device lockdown.

"

It's a subscription service.

The security sites have been pointing out the security risks of vPro for a while now.

3
0
Silver badge

Makes perfect sense

You are all assuming that Intel is talking about work devices, but they are talking about phones and slates, perhaps even ultrabooks. The first 2 will probably just run Windows Phone 8 or an ARM-Emulator to run Android, the later will be so expensive and fragile nobody even dares doing work with them. The market Intel is aiming at is the "expensive toy" market.

If they wanted to target the professional user, they'd have ECC memory controllers which can either be used to keep your data more secure or to lower the power consumption in suspend to RAM. (ECC=>more acceptable bit errors in RAM=> less RAM refreshes needed)

0
0
This topic is closed for new posts.

Forums