From owner-freebsd-multimedia Fri Mar 21 13:49:09 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id NAA15416 for multimedia-outgoing; Fri, 21 Mar 1997 13:49:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from rah.star-gate.com (rah.star-gate.com [204.188.121.18]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id NAA15409 for ; Fri, 21 Mar 1997 13:49:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from rah.star-gate.com (localhost.star-gate.com [127.0.0.1]) by rah.star-gate.com (8.8.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id NAA02123; Fri, 21 Mar 1997 13:48:51 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199703212148.NAA02123@rah.star-gate.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 1.6.9 8/22/96 To: Steve Passe cc: "Louis A. Mamakos" , Michael Petry , multimedia@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Continquous Memory vs Virtual Memory In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 21 Mar 1997 14:43:38 MST." <199703212143.OAA25231@Ilsa.StevesCafe.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Fri, 21 Mar 1997 13:48:51 -0800 From: Amancio Hasty Sender: owner-multimedia@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Nope, because the risc program is build in a allocated area in the kernel which the user can't override. If someone wanted to over-write a particular region of memory with the output of the bt848 , they can . Is this a security problem, in an extreme case yes. Amancio >From The Desk Of Steve Passe : > Hi, > > > The current "risc" programs in the bt848 driver makes it difficult for > > people to screw up their systems . Granted , the PCI to PCI scheme > > still leaves a nice way for someone to pass an illegal address; > > are there security issues here, ie could some clever programmer > write to the kernel/other program space by cleverly building a RISC program > with the address of memory other than the expected target video card? > > -- > Steve Passe | powered by > smp@csn.net | Symmetric MultiProcessor FreeBSD >