Display of system users: Selecting the face

[Oswald Buddenhagen]

On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 06:16:39PM +0200, Friedrich W. H. Kossebau wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, 7. Juli 2005 11:58, schrieb Oswald Buddenhagen:
> > On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 03:22:53AM +0200, Friedrich W. H. Kossebau wrote:
> > > This could be done by downscaling from one given picture with the
> > > largest size needed, like 140x140 or 300x300.
> >
> > no way this is going to work:
> > - slow.
> 
> Another (additional) solution would be to do the scaling once (when adding the 
> face) and save the results to disc. 
> 
this is what is happening now. well, only for the face.icons, actually,
as the faces are practically unsupported. sure, it would make sense to
offer a down-scaled version of the image selected as the face for the
icon - as long as it is possible (and recommended) to set the icon
separately ...

> > > Enabling users to provide their own face as a file in their home dir
> > > works with display managers. They usually are run with superuser rights
> > > (or have some helper demons which are), so they can access all files.
> >
> > while kdm currently has code that setuids to the owner of the image, a
> > comment (i mean, _a comment_ - in _my_ code!! :) clearly indicates that it
> > is supposed to run as nobody.

> > actually, i could/should change this right away - no need for the
> > entire greeter to run as nobody for this.
> 
actually, i did just after the post ...

> > ergo, inaccessible image -> no image - without exceptions
>
> I do not really get what you say here? Go with nobody or don't?
> 
any non-root. if the image is public, it is visible. that simple.

> > > But might this put danger on security? What if someone manipulated
> > > one's addressbook and therefore the system displays the wrong person?
> >
> > you can do this with the .faces as well. that's one of the reasons why
> > the *Admin* variants still exist.
> 
> Okay. So we could allow users to set up their own set of faces and names for 
> the other users and enable the admin to outkiosk that, then. 
> 
?

> > > User given faces might be used if the files are readable to other user
> > > and allowed to be used.
> > > In fact we rip out the controlling of faces from the display manager
> >
> > yes, but consider the distinction between the *Admin* and *User*
> > variants.
> 
> Sure. While I miss to see the need for UserOnly ;)
> 
an admin might want to play a bit without completely destroying the old
config. for the same reason EnableAutoLogin=false exists, even though an
empty AutoLoginUser means the same.

-- 
Hi! I'm a .signature virus! Copy me into your ~/.signature, please!
--
Chaos, panic, and disorder - my work here is done.