On Sat, Dec 02, 2017 at 08:37:34PM +0100, Jan Klemkow wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 02, 2017 at 08:17:15PM +0100, Jan Klemkow wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 01, 2017 at 04:17:42PM -0700, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> > > So two comments: Calling this thing by the right name (escape),
> > > would allow you to search
On Sat, Dec 02, 2017 at 08:17:15PM +0100, Jan Klemkow wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 01, 2017 at 04:17:42PM -0700, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> > So two comments: Calling this thing by the right name (escape),
> > would allow you to search other programs which have similar functions,
> > see if someone did it
On Fri, Dec 01, 2017 at 04:17:42PM -0700, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> > The diff adds the option -k (for kiosk mode)
>
> Congratulations, you win some sort of prize. That is the worst-named
> option I have seen in more than a decade.
Thanks. :-)
> Good idea though, but I think we have better
> The diff adds the option -k (for kiosk mode)
Congratulations, you win some sort of prize. That is the worst-named
option I have seen in more than a decade.
Good idea though, but I think we have better getopt interfaces for
blocking escapes in other commands. ssh has to do this, and I
Hi,
I run cu(1) as ssh forced command for other users on my machine.
This allows them to reach the serial port of their machines over mine.
To prevent them of doing filesystem operations or further command
executions I implement this diff.
The diff adds the option -k (for kiosk mode) to cu(1)
