![]() | ||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Christophe, Fair enough, and point taken. Thanks for the clarification. I am puzzled by the need to modify buffers on the fly inside the FSM. This is straight out of some unpublished information, so it struck a raw nerve. Just be aware this tends to follow the design and could be used for such. Cheers, Andre Hedrick LAD Storage Consulting Group On Fri, 2 Jan 2004, Christophe Saout wrote: > Am Fr, den 02.01.2004 schrieb Andre Hedrick um 05:43: > > > I am sorry but adding in a splitter to CPRM is not acceptable. > > Digital Rights Management in the kernel is not acceptable to me, period. > > > > Maybe I have misread your intent and the contents on your website. > > > > Device-Mappers are one thing, intercepting buffers in the taskfile FSM > > transport is another. This stinks of CPRM at this level, regardless of > > your intent. Do correct me if I am wrong. > > I can assure you I was never having DRM or anything like this in mind > nor making fundamental changes to the IDE layer. It was just that > ++bi_idx that bugged me. Must be a misunderstanding, sorry. :) > > The only thing I'm having on my website is a device-mapper target that > does basically the same as cryptoloop tries to. It's just about > encrypting sensitive data on top of any other device, nothing else. > > - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | |||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 12:59 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | ||||||||||