Mailinglist Archive: opensuse (1165 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [opensuse] Re: Should openSUSE review it's Security Policies?
  • From: Per Jessen <per@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sat, 03 Mar 2012 14:04:09 +0100
  • Message-id: <jit4s7$t9l$>
Basil Chupin wrote:

I don't understand why a password would be required to disable the

Not to disable, to unlock after it has kicked in.

This is no protection for confidential data on the screen - what you
need for this is the Lock function which is activated at your chosen
time; that is, immediately you select to Lock and blank the screen.
And you don't even have to ask anyone to turn their backs to the
screen while you wait for the screen saver to kick in.
Maybe I am missing some significant difference between "lock" and
"activate screensaver"? Does KDE have different settings for lock
and screensaver?

Aren't you using KDE?

Yup, I'm on KDE.

But if you are using KDE then there is a difference between Lock and

Sofar I have been using "Lock" and "Screensaver[any]" interchangeably. I
don't care which one it is as long as (we have a security profile in
which) auto-lock/screen-saver:

1) is enabled by default with a reasonable timeout,
2) cannot be disabled
3) always requires a password to unlock.

For me this setting is applicable for home use as well as in the office,
but I accept that not everyone would want it at home. Maybe the
proposed security profile ought to be divided by intended usage instead
of level.

Per Jessen, Zürich (13.4°C)

To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@xxxxxxxxxxxx

< Previous Next >
This Thread
Follow Ups