Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 26 May 2005 18:33:27 +0600 | From | "Alexander E. Patrakov" <> | Subject | Re: [OT] Joerg Schilling flames Linux on his Blog |
| |
Bodo Eggert wrote:
>So we can > >1) give up and let any application with write access destroy the hardware > > That won't be a problem if all apps with write access are running as root or setuid and thus the list of them is well-controlled by root.
>2) implement a basic filter (common for all deviced) and a device-specific > filter, which can be set by a userspace application. > > In fact both approaches are used in the kernel.
(1) is used in the usbfs code, and thus SANE and gPhoto2 rely upon it (BTW it's still possible for a user to install an old version of SANE into /home/user and damage a scanner). Proper filtering in the kernel would be probably just too complex in this "usb generic" case.
(2) is used e.g. in DRM code.
What's missing is a clearly stated policy that says which of those two approaches should be applied in each particular case.
-- Alexander E. Patrakov
- 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/
| |