In Message <199501300419.XAA20475@pain.lcs.mit.edu> ,
   Chris G Demetriou <Chris_G_Demetriou@LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU> wrote:

=>> I can see that there might be reasonable arguments for making
=>> the level of kernel security optional. Or just include the aperture
=>> driver in the tree. If anyone is going to be putting things into the
=>> kernel, it should be the NetBSD team, not XFree86, and having device
=>> drivers as standard equipment makes for good PR.
=>
=> [ ... stuff omitted ... ]
=>
=>There are other possiblities that could be better than the aperture
=>driver.  for instance, allow mappings of /dev/vga both in the normal
=>VGA video RAM area, and above however much RAM happens to be in the
=>machine.  It's not clear how safe _that_ is to me, however, for other
=>reasons.  But no matter how you cut it, we should _NOT_ be
=>distributing or supporting the aperture driver.
=>
   Ok, I figured this might be the case. Fair enough. How about the
other idea of having an option to init securelevel to -1? I would
much rather have this in the kernel config file than manually edit
the source every time there is a change. Thanks.

                                      Gary D. Duzan
                         Humble Practitioner of the Computer Arts