On Wed, 2009-08-19 at 20:14 +0000, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Well in that case, I'm marking the gdm Ubuntu task as invalid. The
> Debian shadow maintainer has agreed that /etc/securetty should mark
> these X displays as trusted. This hasn't entirely been implemented yet
> since fusa jumps straight to :20 as its next display number and
> /etc/securetty only goes up to :3 currently, so this still needs to be
> implemented (either by supporting wildcards in pam or by listing out all
> the displays in /etc/securetty), but in either case no code can or
> should be changed in gdm for this.
>
> ** Changed in: gdm (Ubuntu)
> Status: Fix Committed => Invalid
>
> ** Changed in: pam (Ubuntu)
> Importance: Undecided => Medium
>
Thanks for agreeing with me on this case
On Wed, 2009-08-19 at 20:14 +0000, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Well in that case, I'm marking the gdm Ubuntu task as invalid. The
> Debian shadow maintainer has agreed that /etc/securetty should mark
> these X displays as trusted. This hasn't entirely been implemented yet
> since fusa jumps straight to :20 as its next display number and
> /etc/securetty only goes up to :3 currently, so this still needs to be
> implemented (either by supporting wildcards in pam or by listing out all
> the displays in /etc/securetty), but in either case no code can or
> should be changed in gdm for this.
>
> ** Changed in: gdm (Ubuntu)
> Status: Fix Committed => Invalid
>
> ** Changed in: pam (Ubuntu)
> Importance: Undecided => Medium
>