Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2006 11:49:58 -0700 From: Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org> To: Wesley Morgan <morganw@chemikals.org> Cc: freebsd-security@freebsd.org, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=22Jos=E9_M=2E_Fandi=F1o=22?= <freebsd4@fadesa.es> Subject: Re: atheros chips dangerous? Message-ID: <44DCD156.6030108@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20060811123921.K43265@volatile.chemikals.org> References: <38802.1155288265@critter.freebsd.dk> <20060811123921.K43265@volatile.chemikals.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Wesley Morgan wrote:
> I agree, the Atheros driver is fantastic. The driver may be "binary" in
> some ways, but I think we got the best of both worlds. The vendor is
> providing every scrap of information necessary without having to give
> away trade secrets, and FreeBSD got a driver authored by a developer who
> is probably one of the most qualified people in the world to work on it.
> I know I go out of my way to purchase and recommend Atheros-based
> wireless devices because of this.
>
> Anyone who simply makes the blanket assumption that because something is
> "FOSS" that it gets more peer review need only to look at some of the
> oldest open source projects around, such as sendmail or XFree/Xorg, to
> realize that security problems can persist for years without being
> discovered.
I can't resist the urge to add a "me too" on all points here, especially the
part about going out of my way to use and recommend Atheros bits. These guys
are a model for how hardware vendors can successfully interact with the open
source community for mutual benefit.
Doug
--
This .signature sanitized for your protection
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?44DCD156.6030108>