Date: Fri, 21 Mar 1997 13:48:51 -0800 From: Amancio Hasty <hasty@rah.star-gate.com> To: Steve Passe <smp@csn.net> Cc: "Louis A. Mamakos" <louie@TransSys.COM>, Michael Petry <petry@netwolf.NetMasters.com>, multimedia@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Continquous Memory vs Virtual Memory Message-ID: <199703212148.NAA02123@rah.star-gate.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 21 Mar 1997 14:43:38 MST." <199703212143.OAA25231@Ilsa.StevesCafe.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
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 >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199703212148.NAA02123>