[lkml]   [2000]   [Jul]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectIF 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...


    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
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:57    [W:0.018 / U:42.000 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site