Re: user not authorized to run X, strange variant
sena wrote:
>
> On 12/12/2000 at 11:35 -0800, Erik Steffl wrote:
> > my point was that these options do not help in what I think is by far
> > most common situation. then again, I have no lies neither statistics to
> > support this:-)
> >
> > I mean the most common situations should be solved first, then special
> > cases. maybe I'm missing something but I can't find any docs on this...
> >
> I think the most _appropriate_ approach is to make things secure above all.
> That must be why X comes rootonly by default until someone changes it. Nice.
that's the problem. the default is secure but the most typical (my
assessment) setup cannot be made secure as you have to let anybody run
X. what's the use of security measure that has to be disabled in most
cases?
so while I agree with you first sentence and your second sentence I
certainly do not think it's nice.
it may be possible to set it up somehow that only root & xdm or
console user & xdm can start X but since I cannot find any docs on
this... I'll try to search the /usr/doc when I get home... maybe there's
some readme/faq there.
erik
Reply to: