Evan Langlois wrote:
>
> If I'm reading this thread correctly, we're saying that the OS will not let
> you issue certain commands to the hardware even if you are root? We are
> gonna cripple the OS by making sure there is software it CAN'T run, forcing
> people to use DOS and Windows?
>
> What happened to the hacker philosophy of using an OS that will let you
> experiment with your hardware if you are smart (or stupid) enough to do so?
>
> When did Linux become an OS that hand-holds the users and stops the system
> admin from doing whatever he/she wants with his/her own machine? Did someone
> sneak some Redmond or Apple reps in here? The idea is absurd, and I bet
> windows doesn't even have this sort of "protection" (and windows 98 by
> default asks if you are sure you want to browse the windows/system
> directory!!)
>
> What's next? Do we not allow X to configure the video card anymore cause it
> might possibly create video modes that damage your monitor? Do we have to
> reboot and use a vendor supplied utility to change video resolutions? Isn't
> it the same thing? Most monitors cost more than a hard drive. And mine, no
> OS vendor could ever support it - I have to use my own modedb.c to get the
> framebuffer programmed into something it supports, and my own XFree modes to
> make X sync. Who is gonna stop Linux from making Vesa video modes? They
> will probably *FRY* my monitor. What happens when company Z introduces the
> new whiz-bang gadget that plugs into an IDE port and uses one of these
> outlawed instructions for its normal operation? Just boot off a floppy to
> use it right? And we can change video modes to bad things then too, and
> flash the drives. Hey, lets make an OS we can boot off floppy for when Linux
> is too crippled to do it itself!
>
> If someone wants to bloat the kernel by adding such "protection" thats fine,
> but if it takes permission away from root to do it, you can expect I'll
> remove it from my kernel (my box, my drives, my right to screw it up). I
> think I'd rather have the non-executable stack patch (as futile as it is)
> than anything designed to stop root from doing as he pleases.
>
> -- Evan
Chill, Dude.
The ranting has been officially declared VERBOTEN!
(That's probably not spelled right- I went to Public High Schools in the
USA where I was prohibited from taking German as a second language
because my cousin (with the same last name) was already in the class. I
kid you not.)
Besides, the plan is/was/may someday be to default to SAFE, don't screw
the drive mode, with a kernel compile time option to allow you to tinker
with an unrestricted interface. You can have your undiluted root power
anytime you want. Seems like a very acceptable compromise to me, as most
of the new Linux users don't know who 'root' is, or think they are
sharing their computers with their houseplants...
Chris Kloiber
-
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 : Mon Jul 31 2000 - 21:00:20 EST