Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Mon, 24 Jul 2000 13:30:27 -0700 (PDT) | | From | Andre Hedrick <> | | Subject | Possible Solution for ATA Mess... |
| |
I have spoken with anther member and the idea to be draft will statisfy Linux needs.
Because there is no lock to enable/disable vender unique commands and no language that protects against its use.
The 1ST proposal that I will put forward will state something like this:
All devices shall reject all vender-specific commands when the vender-unique enable is not set. In addition enabling any vender-specific commands shall not be done by anyone but the vender of the product.
The 2ND proposal that I will put forward will state something like this:
The HOST portion of the reporting-logs will be defined as a a record to record the time and date of these vender-unique enable calls. This will be a write only and shall not earasable by any means. In addition the vender shall provide a signature the authenticates the approved access, and all other accesses should not provide a signature.
With these two in place the filter can ignored for the uses put before eariler.
It has taken a lot of wacking over my think skull but I have agreed that this was view in a light that was protective. I was partly correct in the reading of the SPEC, but it left HOLEs that resulted in actions pushed forward.
Because the word "shall" == must always do regardless.
You can not fault me for trying to follow the standard. You can fault me fore being an ARSE, and a GOOD on at that.....
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/
|  |