Hi, * Premysl Hruby <dfe...@gmail.com> [2010-01-19 12:21]: > On (19/01/10 12:05), Nico Golde wrote: > > * Andres Perera <andres...@gmail.com> [2010-01-18 22:16]: > > > On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 4:23 PM, anonymous <aim0s...@lavabit.com> wrote: > > > >> This thread is hilarious, I find it pretty funny that on a mailing > > > >> list of the > > > >> suckless project people are suggesting all kinds of weird things to > > > >> solve this > > > >> instead just using exec /usr/bin/dwm in ~/.xinitrc rather than > > > >> /usr/bin/dwm. > > > > > > > > Just checked: I was always using exec in xinitrc. And I can still > > > > killall slock. > > > > > > I'm also using exec dwm in xinitrc, as are most people that use startx or > > > xinit. > > > > > > That doesn't solve anything. > > > > Huh? What is the issue then? The original mail stated the problem is > > putting > > the shell into background by ctrl-z and then killing slock which clearly > > doesn't work if you exec into startx. > > Problem here is not using exec startx or startx & exit, not using or not > using exec in xinitrc/xsession!
So what else is it? Being able to switch to the console is no security issue. Being able to interact with a shell where there shouldn't be one, is. Cheers Nico -- Nico Golde - http://www.ngolde.de - n...@jabber.ccc.de - GPG: 0xA0A0AAAA For security reasons, all text in this mail is double-rot13 encrypted.
pgpxBCnihKSSJ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
