From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christophe Saout Subject: Re: CPRM ?? Re: Possibly wrong BIO usage in ide_multwrite Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2004 13:45:22 +0100 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <1073047522.4239.6.camel@leto.cs.pocnet.net> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: To: Andre Hedrick Cc: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org Am Fr, den 02.01.2004 schrieb Andre Hedrick um 05:43: > I am sorry but adding in a splitter to CPRM is not acceptable. > Digital Rights Management in the kernel is not acceptable to me, period. > > Maybe I have misread your intent and the contents on your website. > > Device-Mappers are one thing, intercepting buffers in the taskfile FSM > transport is another. This stinks of CPRM at this level, regardless of > your intent. Do correct me if I am wrong. I can assure you I was never having DRM or anything like this in mind nor making fundamental changes to the IDE layer. It was just that ++bi_idx that bugged me. Must be a misunderstanding, sorry. :) The only thing I'm having on my website is a device-mapper target that does basically the same as cryptoloop tries to. It's just about encrypting sensitive data on top of any other device, nothing else.