On Fri, 24 Aug 2001, Sven wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 22, 2001 at 01:04:34PM -0400, Adam C Powell IV wrote:
> > One other factor nobody has mentioned here is SECURITY. For
> > buffer-overflow type security holes, remote and local, almost all of the
> > exploits are written for i386, so non-Intel platforms are inherently
> > less vulnerable. Last week's LWN security section opened with a piece
> > estimating that a fast worm should in theory be able to spread to all
> > vulnerable networked machines in the world in as little as 15 minutes,
> > which is a whole heck of a lot faster than I apply upgrades, so any time
> > which heterogeneity in OS, server software or CPU arch can buy is really
> > crucial.
>
> mmm, is this really an argument for a laptop ?
So let's build your own laptop. Don't forget to use your own CPU design
(implemented in FPGA/CPLD?) to make sure your stackframe format differs from
all other formats.
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
