Date: Sat, 22 Mar 1997 00:31:04 -0600 (CST) From: Tony Kimball <alk@pobox.com> To: hasty@rah.star-gate.com Cc: smp@csn.net, multimedia@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Continquous Memory vs Virtual Memory Message-ID: <199703220631.AAA29582@pobox.com> References: <199703220014.SAA28132@compound.east.sun.com> <199703220034.QAA03483@rah.star-gate.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Quoth Amancio Hasty on Fri, 21 March: : the device can be protected as well as the program Indeed, I agree with the poster who suggested that appropriate use of device permissions is sufficient to address this problem. One need not move RISC code generation into the kernel in order to make it secure: One may instead move the barrier of security out into userland. Let dtv be setuid and the device permissions limited. I agree that the X server analogy is a good one.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199703220631.AAA29582>