Am Samstag 25 Februar 2006 11:53 schrieb Christoph Hellwig:
>From a short glance over the driver code, the protocol between the _open
source_ driver and the binary user space daemon seems to be quite defined and
unobfuscated. Obviously, someone owning the device has to verify that the
daemon doesn't tamper the hardware beyond the driver's back.
> We have support for other software radios.
There is a difference. As kernel developers, we can put the responsibility to
verify that a device can be operated legally on the user, as you said. A
manufacturer, especially a huge one as Intel, is obligated to take this
burden from their customers - obligated may be by law, may be by company
policy.
> If intel doesn't do the right
> thing support for their hardware will have to wait until someone has
> reverse-engineered their daemon [1].
If someone else reverse engineers and replaces the daemon, it may not be
Intel's problem anymore - but that's all not the point.
Actually, Intel invested a lot of time to avoid shipping a binary only driver
or a HAL like madwifi does. So however this settles, they deserve at least to
be adressed in a less insulting tone than you do in your mails.
Thanks,
Stefan
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
