Any necessity to acquire root authority to suspend a laptop is a hold over from a bygone era.
The rest of your rant is totally based on this misguided idea so I won't bother a point by point analysis. I'll give you a real world example (however trivial) that may illustrate my
On Sunday 25 February 2007 20:32, John Andersen wrote: point a little better. I manage a network, and a home network, where I connect my laptop via wifi and sometimes share it with other users. While my son is using the laptop (for instance) I am also logged into it (sometimes with a remote desk) from my den. I do not want him to be able to shutdown the machine (or suspend it, or hibernate it) while I'm logged into it. In fact, I don't want him to be able to alter that machine in the slightest. He is allowed to signon to it, use it for the purpose we have intended for it, play in his own virtual address space to his hearts content, and then log out. I need to be able to monitor his activity, and access my own resources often at the same time. So, that machine suspends or hibernates only with my own authority (sudo / root). However, as Patrick and Benjamin have pointed out... this is the default for good reason... but it can be easily modified as the situation warrants. The thing I try to encourage (and probably from my security paranoia days at IBM) is that the default should be *locked down* and then opened as warranted... instead of the windoze paradigm which leaves the entire system open (say backdoors, front doors, screen doors, holes in the foundation, leaks in the roof... etc) only closing them under presure as crackers exploit them one by one by one. Its not a rant, and its not a soapbox... its just a paradigm shift. -- Kind regards, M Harris <>< -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org