Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: CNC Control software recommendations

Matt and everyone else,

>If I read you right, your concern is that some _user_ changes the code
>and causes mayhem that you get hung for. If so, there are several solutions:

>1. Don't install development tools on the machines you ship.

Ok, I understand but how available are these tools on the internet for a free download?

>
>2. Password protect configuration files, or put them (or the whole
>system for that matter) on read only media. An example would be that
>your system booted from and ran from a CDROM (can be done today). You'd
>probably need a hard drive for program storage, but there would be NO
>user alterable files that affect system operation.

I agree but due to access speed and other factors I would prefer to have the system on the hard drive.
Is it possible to use a parallel port type key with Linux?

>You might say, "But then it would be a proprietary system!". Not so. A
>_skilled_ person could still make changes, but they would have to go to
>some trouble and this would go a long way toward eliminating your
>liability. As an example, some yahoo could make changes to the
>parameters of a Fanuc control and cause the same type of problems that
>you listed, but the manufacturer would disclaim liability because the
>changes were unauthorized and they couldn't be made inadvertently.

Fanuc parameter setting aren't readily available on the internet for download like Linux and its tools.
Fanuc charges big money for their parameters so they can fall back on - No proof of payment for parameters, no liability.

>Whoever made the changes had to go to considerable trouble. If someone
>went to the trouble of downloading the source code, making changes,
>recompiling, and burning a new boot CD, I think you'd be in the clear.
>Or at least as "in the clear" as you would be with any other system
>since they're all at least somewhat user configurable.

That's allot to have to prove he/she did. Might be easier for the hacker to prove that my system was bad?

>I am all in favor of idiot proofing.

Back to you,

Alex


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]