Re: [dev] Re: [SLOCK] is not safe

On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 08:28:40PM +0100, pascal wrote:
> Le Sun, 17 Jan 2010 19:50:33 +0100
> Moritz Wilhelmy <crap_AT_wzff.de> a écrit:
>
> > On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 10:33:12AM -0800, Thayer Williams wrote:
> > > On Jan 17, 2010 at 07:28 AM, Premysl Hruby <dfenze_AT_gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > On (17/01/10 16:17), Julien Pecqueur wrote:
> > > > > I'm using slock and i am suprised to realize that is not safe at all!
> > > > >
> > > > > I launched slock in my DWM session. I just have to press CTRL+ALT+F1
> > > > > and press CTRL+z (to send startx in background an get the hand on the
> > > > > shell) and type "killall slock" to unlock the session...
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > But that is not problem of slock, but the problem how you start X :-)
> > >
> > > Exactly, the above method doesn't work when X is started like so:
> > >
> > > # auto startx if logging in at VC/1
> > > if [[ -z "$DISPLAY" ]] && [[ $(tty) = /dev/tty1 ]]; then
> > > startx >& ~/.myXLog
> > > logout
> > > fi
> > >
> >
> > This also doesn't work in all cases, for instance if somebody engraves
> > the magic word "Elbereth" into your computer with a magic marker, slock
> > will turn around immediately and flee.
> >
> >
>
> Yeah, unless it polymorphed just before into a @, in which case it will not
> care about it and you will have to "killall slock" again.
>

You can only kill it with a blessed, rustproof +5 IBM Model M in this case.
Received on Sun Jan 17 2010 - 20:31:08 UTC