Vulnerability in nVidia binary drivers

Gullible Jones · 2006-10-17 01:52:38

This is why proprietary stuff doesn't belong in kernel space:

Fixed in the beta drivers, at least.

McQueen · 2006-10-17 03:40:06

I think you meant, "Vulnerability _Fixed_ in nVidia binary drivers"

BTW, funny comment:

"I've weighed the options. I could either:

1) Use Nvidia's evil closed source drivers and take the chance that they'll crash my computer (hasn't happened since 2000) or give a nefarious hacker root (in the unlikely event that I start allowing random strangers to run stuff on my PC), so I can play Quake 4 at 60 FPS.

2) Buy a two-generations-old ATI card, and use the open-source drivers that may give me decent performance on 7-year-old games like Quake 3, but won't even run any modern 3D games, while patting myself on the back for supporting "freedom" and deluding myself about the inherent security and quality in open source drivers (my experiences with previous open source drivers for ATI hardware were less than thrilling in both performance and stability).

I've chosen #1 for now. When somebody releases a high performance, open spec GPU with high-quality open source drivers, I'll be all over it. But until then, I'm just going to have to live with the black spots on my soul left by Nvidia's evil blobs."

chrismortimore · 2006-10-17 09:35:57

I had the same thought process as that comment in McQueen's post.

iphitus · 2006-10-17 09:36:13

some comment mentioned by McQueen wrote:

"I've weighed the options. I could either:
1) Use Nvidia's evil closed source drivers and take the chance that they'll crash my computer (hasn't happened since 2000) or give a nefarious hacker root (in the unlikely event that I start allowing random strangers to run stuff on my PC), so I can play Quake 4 at 60 FPS.
2) Buy a two-generations-old ATI card, and use the open-source drivers that may give me decent performance on 7-year-old games like Quake 3, but won't even run any modern 3D games, while patting myself on the back for supporting "freedom" and deluding myself about the inherent security and quality in open source drivers (my experiences with previous open source drivers for ATI hardware were less than thrilling in both performance and stability).
I've chosen #1 for now. When somebody releases a high performance, open spec GPU with high-quality open source drivers, I'll be all over it. But until then, I'm just going to have to live with the black spots on my soul left by Nvidia's evil blobs."

nobody ever said not to use them, Gullible just showed some dislike in the implementation, which is understandable, it's a pretty shoddy way of going about things. but yeah, as long as there's no reasonable alternative, we're obliged to use it, no matter how pathetically designed they are.

James

shadowhand · 2006-10-17 18:48:32

Vulnerability aside, NV drivers are superior to ATI drivers.... so which binary blob do you want?

I <3 playing Q4, UT2004, TrueCombat, etc at a constant 60fps.

Arch Linux

#1 2006-10-17 01:52:38

Vulnerability in nVidia binary drivers

#2 2006-10-17 03:40:06

Re: Vulnerability in nVidia binary drivers

#3 2006-10-17 09:35:57

Re: Vulnerability in nVidia binary drivers

#4 2006-10-17 09:36:13

Re: Vulnerability in nVidia binary drivers

#5 2006-10-17 18:48:32

Re: Vulnerability in nVidia binary drivers

Board footer