Andre,
Although I think we all respect your role as an IDE god, I personally
believe your off base on this particular issue. It is not the kernel's
role to decide which device access patterns are legal, and which are
not. If such policy is going to be put in place, it should be at the
application level if anywhere.
The rest of the kernel seems to obey this philosophy. For instance,
/dev/kmem does not attempt to restrict memory access to areas that can
only be used to cause harm, and /dev/nvram doesn't prevent you from
overwriting critical NVRAM data with garbage. Using the PPro microcode
driver, I could create cpu-destroyer.c. It wouldn't prove that the
microcode driver needs to verify data passing through it.
The last thing the kernel needs to do is protect hardware from root's
applications.
Later,
Ryan
-
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 - 21:00:15 EST