Ok, now for my $0.02 rant on xhost.... note there is a *large*
difference between
xhost + foo
and
xhost +foo
One is very, very scary as it releases all pretenses of security on
your X session.
Understanding which is which is left as an exercise for the reader.
:-)
David
\_ kewl, this option worked just fine, as I could allow one trusted IP, it
\_ was just what the Dr. Ordered for a brief temporary solution. Thanks to
\_ the others that replied as well.
\_
\_
\_ _______________
\_ Jonathan Furrer
\_ jonny@jofu.com
\_
\_ On Mon, 26 Jun 2000 sinck@owmyeye.ugive.com wrote:
\_
\_ >
\_ >
\_ > \_ Can anyone point me to some documentation on allowing specific hosts to
\_ > \_ connect and display on remote X servers in a passwordless fashion.
\_ >
\_ > YMMV:
\_ >
\_ > server % xhost +a.client-ip.com
\_ >
\_ > client % xclock -display a.server-ip.com # to test ... can't corrupt
\_ > # much with xclock
\_ >
\_ > man xhost, xauth.
\_ >
\_ > ipchains, and ssh may also have amusing information.
\_ >
\_ > David
(text/plain)