On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 19:55:09 -0500, Daniel Phillips <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thursday 17 March 2005 17:01, Timothy Miller wrote: > > The plan is to allow unpriveleged processes to do any evil thing they > > want, as long as it can't compromize system stability. With some > > clever use of mmap, we can restrict which pages of the graphics > > memory are visible to a process, but we're unlikely to be able to > > prevent the process from reading or clobbering someone else's > > windows. > > We're still working on that. I think we ought to make a valiant attempt > to solve the window security problem, so long as it doesn't need more > hardware support than the ownership test. We will make some friends > that way, and hey, it might even be nice.
This isn't a vital feature. It's a bonus feature. It's not going to help anyone running kiosks or using a single PC secured so you can only login from the console. It WOULD help computer labs, but the existing computer labs are using GPUs with less security than what I'm already proposing. To do what you're asking would require the GPU to know more about the resources it's using than I want to have to tell it. A certain amount of virtualization would be in order. For instance, to confine drawing to a window would require that clipping and addressing of drawing be under control of the kernel in some way, or that resources are denoted by handles rather than addresses, requring more hardware. I see value in it. I really do. But I don't see leaving it out being any kind of deal-breaker for anyone who's already limping along with one of the currently available solutions. _______________________________________________ Open-graphics mailing list [email protected] http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
