On Tue, 2007-04-10 at 20:33 +0200, Thorsten Kukuk wrote: > On Tue, Apr 10, Tomas Mraz wrote: > > > What do you think of this idea to add PAM_DISPLAY and/or PAM_DEVICE > > items? > > I missed the case were this makes really a difference. When does an > application has a tty and a display? It probably doesn't have both of them (although I could imagine things like su in a xterm terminal), but having them in separate PAM items would remove ambiguity between device and display. Of course if we simply disregard the possibility to have both display and tty we could use PAM_TTY but at least there should be some recommendation on format of the item value so display can be easily differentiated from a device. Perhaps mandate using the tty device with a full path? > And I'm afraid we need to discuss this with the other PAM > implementation maintainers, too. So maybe we should move it to > at least linux-pam mailing list? Ccing pam-list. Yes, I agree that this should be discussed at least with OpenPAM developers and maybe others. > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=230729 -- Tomas Mraz No matter how far down the wrong road you've gone, turn back. Turkish proverb _______________________________________________ Pam-list mailing list Pam-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pam-list
