[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [MiNT] Security again

To: mint@fishpool.com
Subject: Re: [MiNT] Security again
From: Michael Schwingen <rincewind@discworld.dascon.de>
Date: Sun, 5 Dec 1999 22:23:28 +0100
In-reply-to: <Pine.MNT.4.10.9912032313050.192-100000@milan>; from Frank Naumann on Fri, Dec 03, 1999 at 11:13:23PM +0100
Mail-followup-to: mint@fishpool.com
References: <199912031811.a9399@su.maus.de> <Pine.MNT.4.10.9912032313050.192-100000@milan>
Sender: owner-mint@fishpool.com

On Fri, Dec 03, 1999 at 11:13:23PM +0100, Frank Naumann wrote:

> > The current situation and the idea of a stable kernel are even more
> > concurrent
> 
> I can't agree.

Then please tell us why.

The current situation is this: *any* program can hook in to the trap vector
chain before MiNT, regardless if it was started before or after MiNT. The
proposed change would give MiNT some control over that process, and it would
remove all conforming TSRs from the trap chain before MiNT, thus resucing
syscall overhead drastically.

cu
Michael
-- 
Michael Schwingen, Ahornstrasse 36, 52074 Aachen

References:
- [MiNT] Security again
  - From: Joerg_Westheide@su.maus.de (Jörg Westheide)
- Re: [MiNT] Security again
  - From: Frank Naumann <fnaumann@csmd2.cs.uni-magdeburg.de>

Prev by Date: Re: [MiNT] Harmless part of /kern
Next by Date: Re: [MiNT] What's in, what's out?
Previous by thread: Re: [MiNT] Security again
Next by thread: Re: [MiNT] Security again
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread