Re: ACPI fundamental locking problems

[Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz>]

Hi!

> > The difference with ACPI is that vendors can write code that is executed
> > in the kernel's context (instead of what you can consider the BIOS's
> > context).  That is a whole new can of worms.
> 
> For security reasons alone we need to ensure ACPI can be firmly in the off
> position. Executing US written binary code in the Linux kernel will not be
> acceptable to european corporations, non US military bodies and most 
> Governments. They'd hate the US to get prior warning of say protestors
> walking into their top secret menwith hill base playing the mission impossible
> theme tune then chaining themselves to things..
> 
> And if the NSA wants the US goverment to execute binary only chinese bios code
> on all their critical systems I am sure people will be happy.

...but I still would be happier if there was no AML interpretation...
								Pavel 
-- 
I'm pavel@ucw.cz. "In my country we have almost anarchy and I don't care."
Panos Katsaloulis describing me w.r.t. patents at discuss@linmodems.org