Randomly happens that i come back to computer, sometimes after maybe 30 minutes to find that the screen is NOT locked as it usually happen after some minutes.
Power manager shows that the lock should happen 15 seconds after the screen saver is activated. I do not know where to configure screen saver and why it is not locking.
$ light-locker --debug
[gs_debug_init] ../light-locker/src/gs-debug.c:106 (13:45:45): Debugging enabled
[main] ../light-locker/src/light-locker.c:138 (13:45:45): initializing light-locker 1.9.0
[main] ../light-locker/src/light-locker.c:139 (13:45:45): Platform:
[main] ../light-locker/src/light-locker.c:155 (13:45:45): Features:
settings backend: GSETTINGS
[main] ../light-locker/src/light-locker.c:188 (13:45:45): lock after screensaver 15
[main] ../light-locker/src/light-locker.c:189 (13:45:45): late locking 0
[main] ../light-locker/src/light-locker.c:190 (13:45:45): lock on suspend 1
[main] ../light-locker/src/light-locker.c:191 (13:45:45): lock on lid 1
[main] ../light-locker/src/light-locker.c:192 (13:45:45): idle hint 0
[init_session_id] ../light-locker/src/gs-listener-dbus.c:2234 (13:45:45): Got session-id: /org/freedesktop/login1/session/_32
[find_graphical_session] ../light-locker/src/gs-listener-dbus.c:2104 (13:45:45): Finding a graphical session for user 1000
[init_session_id] ../light-locker/src/gs-listener-dbus.c:2245 (13:45:45): Got sd-session-id: /org/freedesktop/login1/session/_32
[init_seat_path] ../light-locker/src/gs-listener-dbus.c:2326 (13:45:45): Got seat: /org/freedesktop/DisplayManager/Seat0
[gs_listener_delay_suspend] ../light-locker/src/gs-listener-dbus.c:414 (13:45:45): Delay suspend
** (light-locker:1475039): WARNING **: 13:45:45.512: screensaver already running in this session
This might be due to the sensitivity of your mouse. Some mice are very sensitive to vibrations, and this will then interrupt the timer that will lock the screen.
recent topic on screen saver - and the false sense of security they give - lead me to believe the only real option is to logoff - I have done that for years - however - if your disk is not encrypted there is no security in that approach either.
I did a quick test, and it looks like don’t working at all on my end. In AUR you can find GUI for light-locker, maybe this will help you.
pamac search (or install) light-locker-settings
it will lock your screen with lightdm-gtk-greeter. You can set this in whisker menu (right-click > Properties > Commands)
I would like to know more about this. After locking and moving mouse, i see classic Manjaro login screen so i would assume computer locked like this can not be accessed…
Thank you, result:
i have decreased blanking (i expect it to be “screensaver”) from 5 to 2 minutes.
By the way i lock the screen using single mouse click. How to do it: Right click bottom manjaro task bar, Panel / Panel Preferences / Items / Add / Action buttons / then in the properties of it, set “Lock screen” action.
I don’t know how applicable it is to xfce - judge for yourself
@linux-aarhus I have been wasting mine and others time in yours linked topic because of you making an impression in this post saying “false sense of security they give” that there is some insecurity/issue/bug. So i would appreciate if you update that topic (not this one as it does not belong here). I am wasting more disk space here in public because im unable to find personal message link in your profile, says it is private profile. ::
See below quote - your own statement in OP - If that is not a false sense of security - I don’t know what is.
Quote from one of the articles linked in the topic linked to …
You will recall that in 2004, which is now seventeen years ago, I wrote a document explaining why I made the design trade-offs that I did in XScreenSaver, and in that document I predicted this exact bug as my example of, “this is what will happen if you don’t do it this way.”
And they went and made that happen.
Every time this bug is re-introduced, someone pipes up and says something like, “So what, it was a bug, they’ve fixed it.” That’s really missing the point. The point is not that such a bug existed, but that such a bug was even possible. The real bug here is that the design of the system even permits this class of bug. It is unconscionable that someone designing a critical piece of security infrastructure would design the system in such a way that it does not fail safe.
Especially when I have given them nearly 30 years of prior art demonstrating how to do it right, and a two-decades-old document clearly explaining What Not To Do that coincidentally used this very bug as its illustrative strawman! - jwz: I told you so, 2021 edition
OFFTOPIC reply for @linux-aarhus I do not much understand yours quoted text, a bit difficult language for non nativ english speaker. I asked you in my previous post to post your answer into more ontopic topic that you have initially linked in your above replies. That topic is lacking the information that you can provide, but in this topic, we are now offtopic (last 4 posts including this one) and wasting the time of the readers of this topic. This topic is NOT about possible security implications of XScreensaver and moreover my FXCE is not using it i believe. So i would appreciate if this topic is cleaned and the linked topic too so it does not waste time of future readers and i apologize for confusing the things. It is my fault i have poste din that topic apparently and my fault in bad english in this topic, i am sorry.
You are the one keeping on the topic. You are the one relying on locking your screen as security feature, which in it self - unless you encrypt your system - is worthless.