Good morning John! Am Mittwoch, 29. Juni 2016 17:07:05 UTC+2 schrieb john3909: > > What a silly argument. It is well known that when you don’t have physical > security, you don’t have any security. Once you can replace the storage > media, you can make the hardware do whatever you want. This is true of your > laptop and your servers. Clearly by your argument, you haven’t even begun > to understand security. >
You're correct, I don't know much about the Linux terminologie and definitions. From the Linux point of view, this was evidently a silly argument. Do not fred. You're still leading by a two-digit score in this discipline. Does that change much? No, there're still other ways to get firmware on the PRUSS. As a matter of fact there are solutions to use the PRUSS from user space. No example, because I don't want to continue in publishing "how to make a virus" tutorials here. If you don't believe that, just check out the libpruio examples. Most of them work with user privilegues, root permission is necessary for pinmuxing only. > In addition, you should reframe from impugning a person's motivations or > intentions. > It's confusing when you talk to yourself. > If you didn’t know, for stability reasons, Linux do not remove fameworks > unless they have been replaced by something better and in most cases the > new framework is backward compatible with the new framework. > Obviously there're exceptions. The PRU support is neither better nor backward compatible to previous solutions. Oh sorry, not entirely correct: indeed it has better support for PRU virus activities, targeting the kernel space directly. > No one knows how many developers are using RemoteProc/RPMSG ... > This is an important point! Just a few unquantifiable developers will use it, but in the current configuration it endangers all BB systems by default. > so there is no ways that Linus or his deputies would permit the removal of > this framework. > Is it mainline? I thought it's a TI feature. Anyhow, mainline isn't affected. This safety issue concerns boards with PRUSS, only. > All you can do is attempt to make it better ... > This is making it optional, or at least making PRUSS support optional in that framework and disable it by default. > so stop fighting a loosing battle and join me in fixing what you don’t > like. > That's a damed good idea. Since here we've to wait for a management decision, why don't you use that time for fixing the issue from our March discussion? Or at least answer the still open question <https://groups.google.com/d/msg/beagleboard/ZTKntXOXGyc/GLBOQ2r5BQAJ>. BR -- For more options, visit http://beagleboard.org/discuss --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BeagleBoard" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/beagleboard/ee04b094-812b-43d8-b25a-5985a5fba148%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
