RE: Re: Language interfaces and X.Org sessions per user

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]



William L. Maltby wrote:
> 
> On Sun, 2007-09-16 at 13:09 -0400, Ross S. W. Walker wrote:
> > William L. Maltby wrote:
> > > 
> > > On Wed, 2007-09-12 at 17:23 +0300, Ioannis Vranos wrote:
> > > ><snip>
> 
> > Hogwash, while yes you will definitely need more resources as far
> > as hard disk, memory and network there is no need to worry 
> about user
> > X overwritting user Y's data. Hell Unix and it's variants had been
> > successfully doing multi-user X sessions for years before 
> even Windows
> > 95 was a glint in Bill's eyes.
> 
> As an after-thought, it occurred to me that I may have not 
> been obvious
> enough in my original reply. Having been working on *IX variants since
> PWB V6/7, circa 1978, I've some understanding of *IX general
> capabilities, and some understanding of the basic capabilities of
> various utilities that run on *IX systems. I'm not expert at anything,
> but don't claim such expertise either.
> 
> As to my soapbox paragraph, it seems to fit with generally accepted
> concerns about security issues, at which I'm also no expert. If the
> requested <CTL>-<ALT>... does not imply a local console, I'm glad to
> learn new stuff.

My apologies for the abrasiveness of my statement.

Corruption won't occur, but yes if you aren't using the built-in user
switching capability of the GUI and are just spawning X sessions on
virtual terminals on the console it is conceivable that security can
be compromised.

The built-in user switching in KDE and Gnome auto-locks the current
session, or if the current session is locked allows the console user
to spawn a secondary session on the next available virtual terminal.

This is what the OP is most likely going to want to use.

In a home environment when configuring a shared workstation there is
no real need for the extra resources (except memory) as there will
really only be 1 interactive user at 1 time.

In a corporate environment where a shared X server is handling
multiple X terminals then you will need to scale disk and network
appropriately.

-Ross

______________________________________________________________________
This e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by
the addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged
and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient
of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
distribution or copying of this e-mail, and any attachments thereto,
is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error,
please immediately notify the sender and permanently delete the
original and any copy or printout thereof.

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[Index of Archives]     [CentOS]     [CentOS Announce]     [CentOS Development]     [CentOS ARM Devel]     [CentOS Docs]     [CentOS Virtualization]     [Carrier Grade Linux]     [Linux Media]     [Asterisk]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Xorg]     [Linux USB]
  Powered by Linux