Re: xterm: 'X: user not authorized'
In /etc/X11/Xserver, the second line in a standard install is "Console". Changing it to
"Anybody", as is suggested in the comments in that file gives access of the sort
originally requested. I am a newbie and found this while poking around in my newly
installed potato. Would someone please comment on the security implications of this
change? Is this just an automated invocation of "xhost + "? Or is it something else?
Paul
"Karsten M. Self" wrote:
> on Thu, Nov 29, 2001 at 07:51:26PM +0100, Kim De Smaele (kimdesmaele@skynet.be) wrote:
> >> On 29 november 2001 tom schuetz [mailto:schuetz@mind.net] wrote:
> >>
> >> I can run X windows just fine, and when I run xterm from the command line,
> >> no problem.
> >>
> >> When I run xterm from any point-n-click menu, I get the xterm, and it says:
> >>
> >> X: user not authorized, aborting.
> >>
> >> ..then it proceeds to work just fine. This is a new behavior.
> >>
> >> Has anyone seen this before?
> >>
>
> > try in a sepperated xterm "xhost + "
>
> ***DON'T***
>
> xhost + is grossly insecure and opens your session up to anyone who can
> access your system. It should *not* be used under *any* conditions
> unless you're willing to explain in great length to me why you're
> justified in using it (at which point I continue to reserve the right to
> disagree strongly).
>
> If the situation repeats for all X apps, you've got a problem
>
> Otherwise, you're strongly advised to look at your X session error
> messages in /var/XFree86.<number>.log or ~/.xsession-errors.
>
> Post error message output to list.
>
> Peace.
>
> --
> Karsten M. Self <kmself@ix.netcom.com> http://kmself.home.netcom.com/
> What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand? Home of the brave
> http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/ Land of the free
> Free Dmitry! Boycott Adobe! Repeal the DMCA! http://www.freesklyarov.org
> Geek for Hire http://kmself.home.netcom.com/resume.html
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Part 1.2Type: application/pgp-signature
Reply to: