Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Fri, 21 Jul 2000 19:38:12 -0700 (PDT) | | From | Andre Hedrick <> | | Subject | Re: disk-destroyer.c |
| |
On 21 Jul 2000, David A. Wagner wrote:
> Andrew McNabb <amcnabb@argus-systems.com> wrote: > > Let me try to understand what you're saying... > > It is established that a system's interface allows programs to > > physically destroy a disk drive, without providing any benefit > > whatsoever. However, since it's possible to fry other hardware, > > too, why bother with this problem??? > > > > The fact of the matter is, that it is wrong for a program to > > destroy hardware. It is the kernel's job to ensure that it > > can't. > > Ahh, but you've set up an impossible burden. It is _impossible_ > for the kernel to ensure that a malicious hacker who has obtained > root on your machine does not destroy your hardware. After all, > that hacker can always re-install an old, unsafe kernel version > and ioctl() away, or even bit-bang directly to the raw device!
David,
You are the security expert. Explain the 'shellstack' push, and why the micro-apps that I have shown are of the scale to do this deed with non-root priviledge.
Respectfull,
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/
|  |