Linux-kernel mailing list archive 1998-49,: Re: Linux login security approaches

# Re: Linux login security approaches

Clifford Wolf (clifford@clifford.at)
Wed, 9 Dec 1998 20:01:58 +0100 (MET)

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Jeremy Hansen: "Re: any chance of getting Solaris x86 fs support in 2.0.x?"
- Previous message: Michael K Vance: "[OFF-TOPIC] Re: Linux login security approaches"
- In reply to: Sam Mortimer: "Re: Linux login security approaches"
- Next in thread: Michael Dale Long: "Re: Linux login security approaches"

On Tue, 8 Dec 1998, Sam Mortimer wrote:

> In article <74jr4v$hd1$1@gate.mps.co.uk> you write:
>
> >Get linux 2.1.x, compile in Magic SysReq support. SAK is Alt-Sysreq-K.
>
> why 2.1.x? SAK (that would be Secure Attention Key) has been around for
> ages (went in sometime around 1.1.x, i think). However, it's only
> recently (relatively) been fixed so that it works in raw keyboard mode
> too..

Can I use SAK on the console without Sysreq? I don't like the combo
Alt-Sysreq-K becouse K is next to L and Alt-Sysreq-L would kill the
machine ....

The second reason why I don't like the Sysreq solution is, that It's hard
to press the kombo (the WinNT like Ctrl-Alt-Del is _much_ easier to use).
IMHO Ctrl-Alt-Backspace would be good. Its easy to type and doesn't have
allready a function (except to kill X11 - which is basically SAK).

The third reason why I don't like the Sysreq solution is, that SAK should
be available regardless if Sysreq is enabled.

So long my 0.02 Euro,

- clifford

-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Clifford Wolf (CEO and CTO)
The ROCK Projects Workgoup IRC: IRCnet / clifford
http://www.rock-projects.com/ http://www.clifford.at/
e-mail: c.wolf@rock-projects.com email: god@clifford.at

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

- Next message: Jeremy Hansen: "Re: any chance of getting Solaris x86 fs support in 2.0.x?"
- Previous message: Michael K Vance: "[OFF-TOPIC] Re: Linux login security approaches"
- In reply to: Sam Mortimer: "Re: Linux login security approaches"
- Next in thread: Michael Dale Long: "Re: Linux login security approaches"