"m. allan noah" <kitno455 at gmail.com> wrote:
Hi,
>>> + printf ("# anything with device-id \"6\" in the SCSI-system is a
>>> scanner.\n");
>> There's no way generic rules like that are going in, because it's a
>> given that they'll end up breaking something on users' systems down
>> the road.
>
> Julien- I think I have to side with Dieter at least on the device type
> 6 being always allowed. We don't know the exact vendor or model
> strings for any scsi device in the .desc files. Many times, the
It's OK for type 0x6, indeed. I was confused by the comment which
improperly used "device-id" which has another meaning in SCSI jargon
and made me go "WTF?".
> backends don't even know. I'm indifferent toward the 'processor'
> models, since there are so few and it should be possible to get a list
> of those.
Type 0x3 can't get a generic rule, we don't know what else could be
connected to the system advertising this device type; this would open
a security hole.
And the whole point of this exercise was to get a list of such devices
to tell HAL to treat them as scanners, so I think we're good with the
updated patch I posted.
JB.
--
Julien BLACHE <http://www.jblache.org>
<jb at jblache.org> GPG KeyID 0xF5D65169
