From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <44D20A95.3000505@asgaard.homelinux.org> Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2006 16:39:17 +0200 From: =?UTF-8?B?Ik5pbHMgTy4gU2Vsw6VzZGFsIg==?= User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (X11/20060614) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@cse.psu.edu> Subject: Re: [9fans] Best installation for a standalone desktop References: <599f06db0608030708k59bca74ejbae0b8b9ffba4216@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <599f06db0608030708k59bca74ejbae0b8b9ffba4216@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Topicbox-Message-UUID: 957f48dc-ead1-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 Gorka guardiola wrote: > On 8/3/06, csant wrote: >> Hola, >> >> I have been wondering what the best Plan 9 installation for a standalone >> desktop machine would be. Initially I had been thinking the default >> terminal installation was a good choice, but it seems to not require the >> user to actually log in - or is there a way on a standalone terminal to >> require authentication? > > A terminal doesnt listen to services on the net, so authentication is > not an issue. > If what you want is simply to put a password to go to take a coffee, > there is > a lock command, but I am not sure if it comes with the regular > distribution. > >> >> As far as I am understanding things, I need to configure the machine as a >> cpu and authentication server to use it as a standalone desktop machine >> where users need to authenticate to log in? Or provide a bios password if your box has such a thing. "security" on desktop computers are often false security - with a password protected login someone can boot another alternative OS and access data at the drives anyway - not to mention steal the harddrive.