[argyllcms] Re: More on instrument access
- From: Graeme Gill <graeme@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2008 18:41:58 +1100
Frédéric Mantegazza wrote:
I agree, but I also think it is better to lock an unknown device from user
rather than let him do bad things. This is why Linux is much more secure.
But each davantage has its dark side ;o)
But this is where it is dumb. If it's an unknown device,
then it can't "do bad things", since nothing with root
access knows or wants to access it (except in a generic way).
Any user mode access to the device via a generic driver
likewise can't do "bad things", because it's user mode access.
Apart from the purely reflex "lets lock it dow, just in case"
I have yet to hear a rational for such a thing.
OS X doesn't do such a thing, and yet there are no stories
about some security breach due to this, or any plausible
theory as to how such a breach could occur.
As you said, the big problem is the udev mecanism, far too complicated, or,
at least, its lack of a user friendly interface... If you browse the
Guilde archive (a french linux users group ml), you will how many times I
asked for udev related problems!
You and anyone else trying to use a device not part of a distributions
built in support.
Graeme Gill.
Other related posts:
