lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1999]   [Aug]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: idea: MAC level compression & crypto
    Does this apply even if they aren't "for" crypto, but just happen to be
    good places for crypto code to latch on to? How is it decided? I mean,
    couldn't a call to main() be considered a crypto hook?

    what if it's just named frobnostigate_data? even if it has to be
    considered a "debugging" hook, and a function written to strobe the caps
    lock indicator each time it's called, to give it semblance of
    legitimacy... then, two weeks later someone "notices" the potential and
    releases a crypto module...

    -Tymm

    On Sat, 28 Aug 1999, Alan Cox wrote:

    > > > Note we can't put crypto hooks into a kernel because America is stupid (not
    > > > America not Americans). They can go in the kerneli patches. Thats one
    > > > reason for just using ssh 8)
    > >
    > > btw,
    > > that question has been staying around for longer in my head:
    > > why there can not be HOOKS in kernel ?
    > > they arent crypto...
    >
    > Tell that to the US government. It sucks basically.
    >
    >
    > -
    > 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/
    >


    -
    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/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:53    [W:6.424 / U:0.360 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site