[Fwd: Re: [Fwd: Re: gdm && gnopernicus]]

[Brian Cameron <Brian Cameron Sun COM>]

Forwarding George's response to the question of whether AT
programs could use gconf in a safe manner, so the other a11y
people can see.

Brian

-------- Original Message --------
From: George <jirka 5z com>
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: gdm && gnopernicus]
To: Brian Cameron <Brian Cameron Sun COM>
CC: jirka 5z com, Ray Strong Sun COM

On Mon, Sep 29, 2003 at 01:50:24PM -0500, Brian Cameron wrote:
>
> George:
>
> I sent the following email to the gdm sunsite dk alaias on September 16th
> and
> have not yet heard a response.  We are really hoping to get gnopernicus and
> gdm2 working together.  Therefore, I want to verify that our approach
> towards
> using gnopernicus with gconf is sensible.  And if not, what alternatives
> you would suggest.

Must have missed it.  Yes using gconf for gnopernicus is fine since we are
running under the user 'gdm'.  So it all seems fine to me.  I don't think
there are real security issues at this point, though obviously one has to be
careful.  Since every almost gnome program (and that in fact includes
gdmsetup) really "uses" gconf through use of libgnome, we open up the gconf
issue (although it requires authentication to start gdmsetup so not everyone
can start it and exploit it if a security issue existed).  So gconf transport
had better be safe anyway :) Also since accessibility support should be
turned off by default I suppose, then we limit any security problems to a
small set of machines.

George

--
George <jirka 5z com>
   I thoroughly disapprove of duels.  If a man should challenge
   me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and
   lead him to a quiet place and kill him.
                       -- Mark Twain

--

Brian