Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 08:27:49 -0400 (EDT) From: andrewr <andrewr@slack.net> To: Christoph Kukulies <kuku@gilberto.physik.RWTH-Aachen.DE> Cc: freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: xlock Message-ID: <Pine.NEB.3.96.980629081835.12717A-100000@brooklyn.slack.net> In-Reply-To: <199806290632.IAA00836@gilberto.physik.RWTH-Aachen.DE>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The main problem with using xlock is that the people who have made it and
mod'd it over the years, have tried to make it more of a program than it
should be. ie, giving the user more options than are needed for this type
of program. All xlock needs to be is a simple mechanism for locking X,
nothing else.
Also, I am porting a console locking program (doesn't allow VT switching),
from linux, but I have been having trouble with the actual stopping of the
allowing of VT switching. I have tried setting vtmode to be handled by
the process, then using an ioctl to execute this. This failed. Then, I
tried using flock(), that failed. If you have any ideas and would like to
know what I did before (dealing with flock() and ioctl(), just ask).
A.
*****************************************
AWR XNS, Inc.
<andrewr@slack.net>
"Drink beer, it will save your life."
On Mon, 29 Jun 1998, Christoph Kukulies wrote:
>
> Alarmed by recent buffer overflow attacks on Linux machines in
> my vicinity (an exploit for this is available) I thought about
> xlock under FreeBSD and would like to know whether the
> security hole has been sorted out under FreeBSD 2.2.x or what
> measures are advised to prevent it.
>
> --
> Chris Christoph P. U. Kukulies kuku@gil.physik.rwth-aachen.de
>
> To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
> with "unsubscribe security" in the body of the message
>
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe security" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.NEB.3.96.980629081835.12717A-100000>