From owner-freebsd-current Mon Feb 16 18:19:06 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA07260 for freebsd-current-outgoing; Mon, 16 Feb 1998 18:19:06 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from ns.mt.sri.com (sri-gw.MT.net [206.127.105.141]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id SAA07245 for ; Mon, 16 Feb 1998 18:19:00 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from nate@mt.sri.com) Received: from mt.sri.com (rocky.mt.sri.com [206.127.76.100]) by ns.mt.sri.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id TAA21669; Mon, 16 Feb 1998 19:18:59 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from nate@rocky.mt.sri.com) Received: by mt.sri.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id TAA26553; Mon, 16 Feb 1998 19:18:57 -0700 Date: Mon, 16 Feb 1998 19:18:57 -0700 Message-Id: <199802170218.TAA26553@mt.sri.com> From: Nate Williams MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Julian Elischer Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: devfs persistence In-Reply-To: References: <199802162241.PAA00744@pluto.plutotech.com> X-Mailer: VM 6.29 under 19.15 XEmacs Lucid Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > > >> I would say that 99.99% of our user community never modifies the > > >> permissions from the default that MAKEDEV creates. They seem to be > > >> able to use their devices just fine. > > I'd say it's 1% who actually want the permissions to STICK. I think you'd be sadly mistaken. I think it's probably more like 10-20% of the users who modify at least *one* /dev entry on their system. Maybe more than that. > > >Sure, and I was never proposing that the default state would, or > > >should, be insecure. My point was simply that you are suggesting that > > >there should be *no* configurable policy for new nodes. This is > > >inferior to the current methodology, and unacceptable to more than a > > >few people. > > The trouble with new nodes is that you really can't predict REALLY new > nodes. No matter WHAT the mechanism. Sure you can. No new nodes are going to show up on devices you have no driver for, and I certainly hope new kernels aren't built w/out any attention to what's put in them. > > Embedded systems should directly modify the kernel source to get the > > default permissions the way they want. I don't buy the inefficiency > > argument either. Device arrival events should be rare. How often do > > you expect them to happen? Once a second is still a relative eternity > > between arrivals. > > embedded systes probably don't have arriving devices at all. Not true. Think 'small' package PCMCIA/CardBus machines. I know of quite a few 'embedded' systems using laptops right now. Being able to hot-swap out a hard-drive and/or ethernet card or whatever is a big draw. Nate To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message