Thread (29 messages) 29 messages, 4 authors, 2004-01-06

Re: CPRM ?? Re: Possibly wrong BIO usage in ide_multwrite

From: Christophe Saout <hidden>
Date: 2004-01-02 12:45:38
Also in: lkml

Am Fr, den 02.01.2004 schrieb Andre Hedrick um 05:43:
I am sorry but adding in a splitter to CPRM is not acceptable.
Digital Rights Management in the kernel is not acceptable to me, period.

Maybe I have misread your intent and the contents on your website.

Device-Mappers are one thing, intercepting buffers in the taskfile FSM
transport is another.  This stinks of CPRM at this level, regardless of
your intent.  Do correct me if I am wrong.
I can assure you I was never having DRM or anything like this in mind
nor making fundamental changes to the IDE layer. It was just that
++bi_idx that bugged me. Must be a misunderstanding, sorry. :)

The only thing I'm having on my website is a device-mapper target that
does basically the same as cryptoloop tries to. It's just about
encrypting sensitive data on top of any other device, nothing else.
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help