First of all, thanks for your work on the Linux drivers. Although they won't benefit me personally, it's only because of people like yourself that drivers such as these even exist.

?While it doesn't really help security issues of in-kernel proprietary HALs, I'd much rather have a binary vendor HAL from a quite supporting vendor rather than no vendor support AT ALL (as is the case with my ACX1xx wireless cards project, http://acx100.sf.net).?

Don't get me wrong; I commend Atheros for their cooperation in providing support for their hardware. I mean only to discuss the trust issues involved in the use of their binary-only HAL.

?As long as you write "work on BSD *or* Linux" (and not *both*) my project fulfills these requirements, since the ACX111 (TNETW1130) 802.11g cards work quite reliably on Linux (minus WEP support, which I should have implemented months ago - sorry guys), DESPITE completely unavailable vendor support. I'm far from informed about this, but I'd bet my underwear that there are at least two more 802.11g chipsets (semi-)supported.?

Touche. Admittedly, I'm far more in touch with the world of BSD than I am with Linux. I'm still fairly certain that, at least presently, the only choice for BSD-users is the Atheros chipset, which is also usable on Linux with the same binary HAL. Although this is therefore applicable to both BSD and Linux, it appears that Linux users do at least have a choice to use hardware that is supported with a different type of driver. My mistake!

?Thanks for a good thought-provoking article!?

You're very welcome! Thanks for the feedback.

[ reply ]

Link to this comment: http://www.securityfocus.com/comments/columns/281/29404#29404