Is having a TPM header a bad thing?

[ironk]

There are some motherboards that have a TPM header (trusted platform module), so I looked for articles on it and came across this:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/08/23/nsa_germany_windows_8/

I don't know, but is that something to be concerned about? I know the motherboard has a header, so it must have a chip for it too...

 

[Dahak]

No there is nothing to worry about.

The header is there as an option if you which to add the module, other wise it does nothing.

That article not sure what they are trying to prove but. and the fact that was from 2013, the usage of a TPM chip in Win8 and newer is for the option of Secure Boot which allows OEMS(HP,Dell Etc) or the end user to enable which help protect the boot process from rootkits. Which is the end user can disable as well as there was some flack about it preventing you from installing linux

And for the use of Bitlocker to provided better encryption

 

[ironk]

ok, thanks. If the motherboard only has a header, then it doesn't have a chip? Or is the actual chip in the module that is inserted in the header?

I wonder though...if I were to leave the computer and someone plugged in a module, can they lock or "take over" the computer?

 

[ViRGE]

ok, thanks. If the motherboard only has a header, then it doesn't have a chip? Or is the actual chip in the module that is inserted in the header?

I wonder though...if I were to leave the computer and someone plugged in a module, can they lock or "take over" the computer?

Correct. The header is to add the chip; if the board has a header, then it means there isn't a chip on there by default.

And to answer your second question, no more than they could do without TPM today. TPM is really for enabling Bitlocker to protect your data. If someone wanted to deprive you of access to your data, then with physical access they could easily password the drive or better yet just steal it.

 

[ironk]

ok, thanks!