Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2003 19:31:43 -0700 From: Jamie Zawinski <jwz@jwz.org> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Cc: shanehelms@eircom.net Subject: Re: sysinstall and xscreensaver Message-ID: <3E93860F.1896A053@jwz.org>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Shane Helms wrote: > > Against a determined adversary, xlockmore is probably (?) a bit more > secure than xscreensaver Excuse me? In what bizarro-universe can you possibly imagine xlockmore to be more secure than xscreensaver? The xlock/xlockmore model (of running the graphics demos and security code in the same address space) is *fundamentally* broken from a security standpoint. With xscreensaver's design, a fault in the eye-candy code will not cause the screen to unlock, as happens with xlock/xlockmore. In detail: http://www.jwz.org/xscreensaver/versus-xlock.html -- Jamie Zawinski jwz@jwz.org http://www.jwz.org/ jwz@dnalounge.com http://www.dnalounge.com/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3E93860F.1896A053>