> You may have misunderstood me as well. I'm saying Dell should have been
> providing source all along. In fact, I reported them to the busybox
> maintainers a couple of years ago, so that may be why you're finally
> seeing source now.

Ah ok, my apologies.  Yes I agree that they should have been providing
source all along.  I believe the FSF has had enough complaints that they
became involved within the last few months, which is why we're now
seeing code being released.

> What matters more is if we find vulnerabilities. And, since I've been
> able to get a root shell on a DRAC in the past without access to the
> source, I'm fairly confident they're there.

I agree.  I would feel much more comfortable running firmware that had
been community reviewed, as open source projects are.  It may be that
Dell have excellent programmers who write fantastic code, but unless
it's all public I can't trust it.  Given that some of the code has
(legally) been withheld, this does make me suspicious, and all the more
eager to spin my own firmware.

> Dell's firmware and supporting code are *not* securely written. A word
> of advice: don't install the virtual media and remote console plugins in
> a browser you use for other things.

Well there's no problems there, the only time I tried to use virtual
media it complained that the file was too big.  Item #121 on the new
DRAC firmware - virtual media over NFS...  That'll have to come once the
remote console is fixed though :-)

Cheers,
Adam.

_______________________________________________
Linux-PowerEdge mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.us.dell.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-poweredge
Please read the FAQ at http://lists.us.dell.com/faq

Reply via email to