Re: vlock from x11?

[Chris Waters <xtifr@cp.net>]

sen_ml@eccosys.com 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.

Your approach sounds reasonable too -- and to make it work the way you
described, I'd try reserving a VT, and using chvt+vlock in a script. 
But I can't guarantee that'll work, so some testing might be in order. 
:-)

I don't know of any way to trigger that off of an inactivity timeout
though...

cheers
-- 
Chris Waters, Systems Engineer, Critical Path, Inc.
cwaters@cp.net or xtifr@debian.org