On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 9:39 AM, Ethan Grammatikidis<eeke...@fastmail.fm> wrote: > On Fri, 7 Aug 2009 09:29:25 -0300 > Iruata Souza <iru.mu...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 9:05 AM, Ethan Grammatikidis<eeke...@fastmail.fm> >> wrote: >> > On Thu, 6 Aug 2009 11:33:18 +0100 >> > "Steve Simon" <st...@quintile.net> wrote: >> > >> >> I cannot imageine the senario where random people will have access >> >> to the cpu/auth/file server's consoles. It just doesn't happen >> >> if you are serious about security. >> >> >> >> However if you want to protect your console against your friends >> >> I wrote a script to do it /n/sources/contrib/steve/rc/conslock >> >> you may also want to look at screenlock(1) >> >> >> >> Incidentially I may use this at home to protect my servers console >> >> against my 2 year old who rather likes keyboards, though this is >> >> a different type of security. >> >> >> >> -Steve >> >> >> > >> > Speaking of family, I'd imagine a little password protection might go a >> > long way to keeping > the peace in many families. Respect for siblings' >> > property isn't exactly hard-wired into >> > human nature, is it? >> >> no password protection will suffice when ethics fails. > > ETHICS? In a SEVEN YEAR OLD who knows what rm does????? What the fuck planet > are you from? Don't get me started on my teenage years. >
having respect for the shared (or private if you wish) stuff is ethical. if only prohibition is applied, no password protection will work. a seven year old in anger can surely set fire on the computer or whatnot if ethics fails him. iru
