Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/7] ATAPI CDROM passthrough v5

2010-10-19 Thread Alexander Graf
Am 19.10.2010 um 02:10 schrieb Anthony Liguori anth...@codemonkey.ws: On 10/18/2010 06:29 PM, Alexander Graf wrote: A user will get a really nasty surprise if they think they can use a flag or rely on QEMU to prevent a VM from doing something nasty with a device. If they have this feeling

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/7] ATAPI CDROM passthrough v5

2010-10-19 Thread Michal Suchanek
On 19 October 2010 08:17, Alexander Graf ag...@suse.de wrote: Am 19.10.2010 um 02:10 schrieb Anthony Liguori anth...@codemonkey.ws: On 10/18/2010 06:29 PM, Alexander Graf wrote: A user will get a really nasty surprise if they think they can use a flag or rely on QEMU to prevent a VM from

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/7] ATAPI CDROM passthrough v5

2010-10-18 Thread Alexander Graf
On 30.08.2009, at 02:14, Anthony Liguori wrote: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote: The guest can also mess up other devices with the help of specially crafted firmware. So even if the user does not care about the effects on a particular device, a firmware upgrade might affect other devices

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/7] ATAPI CDROM passthrough v5

2010-10-18 Thread Anthony Liguori
On 10/18/2010 06:29 PM, Alexander Graf wrote: A user will get a really nasty surprise if they think they can use a flag or rely on QEMU to prevent a VM from doing something nasty with a device. If they have this feeling of security, they're likely to chmod the device to allow unprivileged