Ark
John Labovitz wrote:
>
> Chip Salzenberg said:
>
> > According to Dr. Werner Fink:
> > > What's about mistakes? This interface is very easy and
> > > therefore it _is_ very dangerous, isn't it?
> >
> > I agree. Perhaps the device should require that writing take place
> > at an offset greater than zero ("dd oskip=1k"?), [...]
>
> i'm just a kernel neophyte here, but since we're talking about hacks
> (;-)...
>
> how about a sort of side-device that's used as a guard? this reminds
> me of the big paper-cutter machine i used in high school print shop --
> one had to press the left-button with the left hand and the
> right-button with the right hand, or the blade wouldn't come down. so
> there could be a /dev/bios and /dev/biosguard, the latter of which has
> to be open (for writing, of course) in order for a dangerous write to
> the former. like this:
>
> fd1 = open("/dev/biosguard", O_WRONLY);
> fd2 = open("/dev/bios", O_WRONLY);
> write(fd2, newbioscode, newbioscodelen);
> close(fd2);
> close(fd1);
>
> i'm assuming the bios driver could know which process has opened
> /dev/bios and make sure that same process has also opened
> /dev/biosguard.
>
> obviously, this could work under /proc, too.
>
> john
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu