Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 21 Jul 2000 16:00:23 -0700 (PDT) | From | Andre Hedrick <> | Subject | IF only........ |
| |
> Andre, I quite grasp this. I stand by my earlier statement. If it can > be fixed, write the patch and put it in and go on with life. With all
I wrote the patch but it is not wanted "ide.2.4.0-t5-2.all.4c.patch.bz2" I proved the tool to try and break it.
> this carrying on, it's just advertising for the malicious kiddie. > Patches like this should be written and quietly introduced into the > kernel and a tiny blurb made in the ChangeLog saying "ATA protocol > violations prohibited". If it can't be fixed, the advertising of a > bad design flaw is certainly not a good thing.
I tried and failed to get it in........ It is so important that people need to be aware.
> Everybody would be inherently safer from the malicious kiddie who > doesn't [yet] know how to break things and may never know.
Not if you do not know about it and the protection is denied.
> By carrying on about it for a week, it's a nice honeypot for that > malicious kiddie to search the archives and build a workable exploit to > destroy hardware.
I exposed it because was exposed. And shown to me. I was not looking for this but it was shown to me and when I finally figured out what to make of it and do. Nothing happened...
Cheers,
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/
| |