From owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Aug 11 09:24:28 2006
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG>
X-Original-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D53216A4DD
	for <freebsd-security@freebsd.org>;
	Fri, 11 Aug 2006 09:24:28 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from phk@phk.freebsd.dk)
Received: from phk.freebsd.dk (phk.freebsd.dk [130.225.244.222])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C490C43D6A
	for <freebsd-security@freebsd.org>;
	Fri, 11 Aug 2006 09:24:27 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from phk@phk.freebsd.dk)
Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (critter.freebsd.dk [192.168.48.2])
	by phk.freebsd.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id D59C61703F;
	Fri, 11 Aug 2006 09:24:25 +0000 (UTC)
To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=22Jos=E9_M=2E_Fandi=F1o=22?= <freebsd4@fadesa.es>
From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 11 Aug 2006 11:03:19 +0200."
	<44DC47D7.2050908@fadesa.es> 
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2006 09:24:25 +0000
Message-ID: <38802.1155288265@critter.freebsd.dk>
Cc: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: atheros chips dangerous? 
X-BeenThere: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Security issues \[members-only posting\]"
	<freebsd-security.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-security>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-security>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-security@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-security>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2006 09:24:28 -0000

In message <44DC47D7.2050908@fadesa.es>, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=22Jos=E9_M=2E_Fandi=F1
o=22?= writes:

>> Sam compiled those binaries, he has the source code.
>> 
> And it is a matter of trust.
>
>from the phk's comments I deduce that it was a NDA between Atheros
>and FreeBSD.

The NDA is between Atheros and Sam Leffler.

>In my opinion the difference is that with NDA you place trust in
>a few persons (the ones with the code), whilst with open source
>drivers the code can be reviewed by all people with enough
>knowledge about the subject and since peer review is an important
>concept in FOSS quality (and security) it would be desirable
>to have free code.

While that is certainly true, I also feel that the fact that
Atheros has actively tried to work with the FOSS people to get
a good driver should be credited to them.

Other vendors have been totally impossible to work with.

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.