I try to provide a protective layer to the hardware and everybody says it
is not needed. When it is your problem, I will laugh my ass off at you
that do not know the truth when it is before you. You state that
root==god , you claim reloading modules to bypass the check, etc...
Screw your hardware! Since all of you are so damn smart and know the
ATA-ATAPI specification, you are not sensible enough to see that I showed
you that it can be violated. This violation of the standard, which none
of you have the membership to vote on, is what I was trying to point out.
The reason why you can not do this level of destruction in Microsoft is
that it does not have a HOLE the size of a MAC TRUCK! There is no one to
blame for this, but I should have found it earlier. Now that it is found
something needs to be done.
Since most of you POMPUS SCSI users are down playing the point you have no
room or business to comment on a subsystem that you do not use. I base
this because if you were using ATA you might think twice before calling
NIMBY. It has been clearly pointed out that you have a problem of the
same level, but the hole is smaller and harder to work through.
Since 90% of Linux depends on the ATA subsystem being stable and safe, all
I will claim is that it is stable.
Nice to see that those with the biggest mouths fighting me on the issue
are as big an ASS as me pushing the issue. I am glad to have the company
of ASSHOLES as big as me debating the issue.
Later........
Andre Hedrick
The Linux ATA/IDE guy
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jul 23 2000 - 21:00:14 EST