Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 29 Apr 2004 17:32:46 -0400 | From | Marc Boucher <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Blacklist binary-only modules lying about their license |
| |
Giuliano Colla wrote: > Can you honestly tell apart the two cases, if you don't make a it a case of > "religion war"?
On Thu, Apr 29, 2004 at 11:15:13AM -0400, Timothy Miller answered: > > Firmware downloaded into a piece of hardware can't corrupt the kernel in the > host. > > (Unless it's a bus master which writes to random memory, which might be > possible, but there is hardware you can buy to watch PCI transactions.)
and unless it's a card with binary-only, proprietary BIOS code called at runtime by the kernel, for example by the vesafb.c video driver, which despite this has a MODULE_LICENSE("GPL").
Could someone explain why such execution of evil proprietary binary-only code on the host CPU should not also "taint" the kernel? ;-)
Marc - 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/
| |