From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750908AbWELFHQ (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 May 2006 01:07:16 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750912AbWELFHQ (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 May 2006 01:07:16 -0400 Received: from nz-out-0102.google.com ([64.233.162.197]:5650 "EHLO nz-out-0102.google.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750908AbWELFHO convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 May 2006 01:07:14 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=d06h75XtOvLDgqIVUtJXfbXZW1rpsUd18g9njjgGE/WwIEfhYp7Ux47aNDAl7uZmd5BYw+KhVPtuBt0Jx4aZ2zAWvMqRg/sT0viFD/CiEE4jTk0QBr8oamMm4SmguJB88SbvBEQslhlHQn4687igD63lllsB32Op3igv+l+PQrI= Message-ID: <9e4733910605112207t3e20218akc7b697987c47059b@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 01:07:13 -0400 From: "Jon Smirl" To: "Dave Airlie" Subject: Re: SecurityFocus Article Cc: "linux-os (Dick Johnson)" , "Ed White" , ML In-Reply-To: <21d7e9970605112113s16764073tca5246d1e104503b@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Disposition: inline References: <20060511143440.23517.qmail@securityfocus.com> <9e4733910605112017u428c04cdm2ff40b53785db09c@mail.gmail.com> <21d7e9970605112113s16764073tca5246d1e104503b@mail.gmail.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 5/12/06, Dave Airlie wrote: > Your ideas to fix X didn't result in patches to fix X, ideas are great > we all have ideas, patches are better, for some reason we don't all > have patches. We are fixing X, you are not. In the past I wasted way too much time writing patches for X. I understand now that there is little consensus on where X is going in the future. X has few resources and many of these resources work at cross purposes. You are doing a fine job, please keep up the good work. For my part I have chosen to stop working in such a chaotic environment. But, no matter how you slice it, X is still a multi-megabyte process needlessly running as root which makes it a scary security issue. I know you are already aware of the philosophical and architectural changes needed to switch X to a model where it runs as a normal process and relies on the kernel for privileged operations. You and Ian are taking the first steps, I hope that X will reach the consensus necessary to implement the full change. Question my sanity if you want, but I'm sticking with the old fashion idea that privileged code that mucks with hardware belongs in a device driver. I'm also stuck on the radical idea that only one device driver at a time should be in control of a piece of hardware. X violates both of these. -- Jon Smirl jonsmirl@gmail.com