Tony has provided us with a valuable summary. His view is not, however, mine.
I do not think that the issue is one of misuse by the putative culprit. I am not aware of any suggestion that he has misused this device in any way, and I do not think that it would be in his interest to do so. The issue is that this device, once put in place, lends itself 1) to misuse by others per se and 2) provides a template for the construction of similar devices by malevolent others. Let me also use this post to clean up a loose end. I have received two off-list queries asking me what FLIH means: it is an acronym for First Level Interrupt Handler. I also now think that we have talked this subject to death; but since I don't want to be accused of having shut off this discussion another post would be welcome. John Gilmore, Ashland, MA 01721 - USA
