Re: Possible flaw in XFree?

[Michael Jennings <mej () kainx org>]

On Friday, 28 June 2002, at 07:37:04 (-0500),
Ross Nelson wrote:

> However, the point of xlock is to lock it and prevent things like
> that.

Uh, no.  The point of xlock is to lock the *session*, not the machine.

> I see what you're saying, but if they can do that then there's no
> point in locking.

Sure there is.  Users lock sessions to prevent other users from
gaining access to their authentication.  If I'm logged in via X, and
do not lock my session, another user can sit down at my station, start
up a new terminal window, and do whatever he likes with all the
privileges I have.  Locking the session prevents him from doing
naughty things as me.  It doesn't prevent him from logging in as
himself, nor should it.

> Also, have you tried opening a second X server on one box at the
> same time?  I haven't tried and was wondering if that'd actually
> work.

Of course it works.  That's what multiple displays are all about.  Try
"startx -- :1"

Michael

-- 
Michael Jennings (a.k.a. KainX)  http://www.kainx.org/  <mej () kainx org>
n+1, Inc., http://www.nplus1.net/         Author, Eterm (www.eterm.org)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
 "The Swiss have an interesting army.  Five hundred years without a
  war.  Pretty impressive.  Also pretty lucky for them.  Ever see that
  little Swiss Army knife they have to fight with?  Not much of a
  weapon there.  Corkscrews.  Bottle openers.  'Come on, buddy, let's
  go.  You get past me, the guy in back of me, he's got a spoon.  Back
  off.  I've got the toe clippers right here.' "     -- Jerry Seinfeld