Hi. On Mon, 2005-08-08 at 11:27, Con Kolivas wrote: > On Mon, 8 Aug 2005 10:46 am, Nigel Cunningham wrote: > > Hi. > > > > Sorry for the slow response. Busy still. > > > > On Sat, 2005-08-06 at 15:06, Patrick Mochel wrote: > > > On Fri, 5 Aug 2005, Nigel Cunningham wrote: > > > > Hi. > > > > > > > > I finally found some time to finish this off. I don't really like the > > > > end result - the macros looked clearer to me - but here goes. If it > > > > looks okay, I'll seek sign offs from each of the affected driver > > > > maintainers and from Ingo. Anyone else? > > > > > > What are your feelings about this: http://lwn.net/Articles/145417/ ? > > > > I'm sure it could work, but I do worry a little about the possibilities > > for exploits. It seems to me that if someone can get root, they an > > insmod a module that could schedule any kind of work via any process. > > Tracing that sort of security hole could be intractable. Christoph, is > > that something you've considered/have thoughts on? Perhaps I'm just > > being paranoid :> > > If someone gets root access it means you're already exploited. Yeah, true. Ok. Lame thought :> Nigel > Cheers, > Con -- Evolution. Enumerate the requirements. Consider the interdependencies. Calculate the probabilities.
