[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:0.205 / U:0.068 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site