theregister.co.uk — A recently published attack exploiting newer versions of the Linux kernel is getting plenty of notice because it works even when security enhancements are running and the bug is virtually impossible to detect in source code reviews.
Jul 18, 2009 View in Crawl 4
thewindblowsJul 19, 2009
Actually PulseAudio is well designed typically its been the ALSA drivers at fault.Upgraded my kernel to 2.6.31-3 in ubuntu (with a patch so fglrx works too) and now PulseAudio runs flawlessly with the new ALSA drivers. In fact the audio is the best It's ever been on any platform.
pokobuntJul 19, 2009
Haiku > BSD
m6ackJul 19, 2009
This account has been closed by the user
Closed AccountJul 20, 2009
Are you calling Linux Fanboys foolhardy?
yaroman22Jul 23, 2009
It's not ALSA that f**ks up sound whenever its installed. It's not ALSA that enables this exploit to be performed.Until PA can be installed without f**king up sound, it's Pulse Audio's fault for not even trying to work with ALSA.Since sound works PERFECTLY whenever it's just ALSA, I can only conclude it's Pulse Audio that's the piece of s**t, not ALSA.Believe me, if ALSA was a crapshoot, daemons like, oh, JACK, ESD, Arts, or Phonon would be having the same bulls**t problems Pulse Audio is constantly having across overy distro it's been found on (High latency, blocking some programs from sound altogether, hijacking all sound in Linux, crashing and taking all sound with it.). Since they aren't, it's all on Pulse Audio for being a piece of s**t. Maybe, instead of blindly believing the excuses of the incompetent PA developer, you should maybe stop being a sheep and think maybe, just *maybe* the PA developer has no f**king clue how to develop for ALSA in the first place, unlike the developers of all other Linux-native sound daemons you could run instead that do what PA does, but without breaking everything, like OSSv4.
yaroman22Jul 23, 2009
I don't see how this is a bug in the kernel when this is actually a badly implemented optimization in the... oh... what was it called again? Oh yes. the GNU Compiler Collection. The code is right, it's the compiler that's wrong.
yaroman22Jul 23, 2009
@erictheturtleAnd what other languages would you suggest, hmm? High level garbage like Java or C#?C and C++ are still good languages today, and they're actually designed properly for the sort of needs a kernel would have.
yaroman22Jul 23, 2009
Not only that, but if someone discovered the exploit and published a proof of concept, Apple would deny the exploit exists.I'm thinking about the first 9 months of Leopard here, where people kept saying Leopard was making them miserable and all Apple would say is "No it isn't."
josedenocheJul 23, 2009
its a desing flaw, not a kernel flaw