Re: Security stuff

[Anthony Jacques <jacquesa@zetnet.co.uk>]

> > Personally, I don't really think all this protection is going to 
do much good
> > if we don't do something about GEM as well. At least I always run GEM
> > programs even when using MiNT.
>
> I meant, GEM is not problem, because if security stuff would be available
> and enabled, GEM must be started as root anyways... so all these proposed
> changes don't touch this theme.

Why must GEM be started as root? I guess 'cause it accesses system variables,
but this doesn't mean ALL GEM apps access them?

> The problem is not with GEM, but with thousands titles of GEM software,
> which wants to access for example Cookie Jar and which can't be mostly
> recompiled for new system.

IMO, we have four types of software:
  * old TOS based progs that access cookie jar etc.
  * old GEM based progs that access cookie jar etc.
  * Modern MiNT aware TOS progs that can be made secure with new libs
  * Modern MiNT aware GEM progs that can be made secure with new libs

I dont see why any modern MiNT aware apps cannot be made secure...

Anthony