On Wed, 2008-02-13 at 17:14 -0500, Chuck Anderson wrote:
On Wed, Feb 13, 2008 at 04:12:39PM -0600, Les Mikesell wrote:
> ...in all cases but I have a hard time imagining a case where I'd
> want access cut off to an existing, running session just because
> someone else might want to check their email on a different account
> and they do it from a VT instead of Xnest.
It has been said before. Imagine if someone left a mic snooping
program running on Session #1 while Session #2 came along and started
talking on the phone? This kind of thing should be prevented BY
DEFAULT.
Just to make it more complicated MIC = INPUT != OUTPUT :-)
Ie, the security problem is most likly with input channels, although
most of the complains come on how the output channels are managed.
Just food for thought, I am not pending in either direction.
Simo.
--
Simo Sorce * Red Hat, Inc * New York