On Monday 31 March 2014 11:46:58 Thiago Macieira wrote: > Em seg 31 mar 2014, às 08:55:05, Martin Gräßlin escreveu: > > Personally I have to disagree. To me the graphical login is a an asset > > which needs to be protected in a stronger way. Access to a tty should not > > equal access to the graphical system. The fact that X is broken should not > > result in us adding further insecurities which need to be fixed up once we > > transit to Wayland. The opposite has to happen: all the small security > > issues we let in, because X was already broken need to get fixed. This > > thread turned into a nice TODO list > > I'm not asking for it to be insecure. I've already authenticated by logging > in to the virtual console. So let me unlock my session via D-Bus.
I'm going to implement support for logind. I hope that this is sufficient for the usecase "unlock through DBus". In turn I will not allow a DBus call to unlock the screenlocker to go in. Cheers Martin
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
