On Tue, 26 Sep 2000, Chris Waters wrote: >> the reason i'm not using x-based screensavers is that i'm unwilling to >> disable the ctrl-alt-bs sequence used to stop the x server -- the >> sequence is too useful when i'm diagnosing problems. that leaves me >> w/ using things like vlock because the x-based screensavers appear to >> be pointless w/ the ctrl-alt-bs sequence enabled (has this changed? >> or is my understanding off?). > >Anyone who has access to your console can probably get in if they're >sufficiently determined (think boot floppy). But I agree that there's >no reason to make it easy for them. What I do is start X with the >command "startx&exit". This means that even if someone *does* kill X >(or tries to suspend it), they'll still be faced with a login prompt, >rather than a nice shell prompt.
Why not use xdm? It works for me. On my Thinkpad I have xdm (or more specifically kdm) running displays on vt5 and vt6 so if I am logged in I can lock the screen, change to the other vt, and let someone play with my machine. So I use the regular X screen blanker with a timeout... For when the X server dies I have the SAK enabled in the kernel. CTRL-ALT-BS isn't good enough, if the X server gets properly wedged then it won't accept keyboard input. Russell Coker
