Project

General

Profile

Bug #10970

Feature #5684: Screen locker

Document screen locker

Added by sajolida over 1 year ago. Updated about 2 months ago.

Status:
Confirmed
Priority:
Normal
Assignee:
Category:
-
Target version:
Start date:
01/18/2016
Due date:
% Done:

0%

QA Check:
Info Needed
Feature Branch:
Type of work:
End-user documentation
Blueprint:
Easy:
Affected tool:

Description

It's now possible to lock the screen in Tails 2.0 from the keyboard shortcut Super+L. But not yet from the system menu, see #5878.

We should document this. The first step would be to draft a plan. From the top of my head:

  • Where would this go?
  • Shall we document the limitation (no UI)?
  • Is there any other way to lock the screen than the keyboard shortcut?
  • Do we want to mention the security limitations of screen locking?

team: sajolida, spriver

History

#1 Updated by intrigeri over 1 year ago

  • Do we want to mention the security limitations of screen locking?

FTR, having clear warnings about it was a part I found important in the proposal you made and that was agreed on -dev@.

#2 Updated by nukk over 1 year ago

I'd be happy to test and document this (with the appropriate risks known), but the keyboard shortcut mechanism (Control-Alt-L) does NOT work (it does nothing). Is this feature completely disbabled in 2.0 now?

#3 Updated by sajolida over 1 year ago

  • Description updated (diff)

Sorry for being unclead in the description of the ticket. The shortcut in 2.0 is Super+L (Super is the GNOME name for the Windows key).

#4 Updated by nukk over 1 year ago

Good. Super-L is working. But what it's not doing is actually locking the screen. It just goes into a full screen window that I can just scroll out of the way. How do you actually lock the screen?

Sorry for the n00b sounding questions.

#5 Updated by intrigeri over 1 year ago

Good. Super-L is working. But what it's not doing is actually locking the screen. It just goes into a full screen window that I can just scroll out of the way. How do you actually lock the screen?

You need to set an administration password in the Greeter.

Sorry for the n00b sounding questions.

This is exactly why we have a ticket titled "Document screen locking in Tails Jessie"..

#6 Updated by Dr_Whax about 1 year ago

  • Description updated (diff)
  • Assignee set to sajolida
  • Target version set to 2016

#7 Updated by sajolida about 1 year ago

  • Target version changed from 2016 to Tails_2.6

We'll try to do this for 2.6, right?

#8 Updated by sajolida about 1 year ago

  • Target version deleted (Tails_2.6)

The freeze is passed now, so the feature will most probably not be ready for 2.6 and I don't have to rush to write this documentation \o/

#9 Updated by sajolida about 1 year ago

  • Target version set to Tails_2.6

Actually it will :(

#10 Updated by sajolida about 1 year ago

  • Subject changed from Document screen locking in Tails Jessie to Document screen locker

#11 Updated by intrigeri about 1 year ago

  • Target version changed from Tails_2.6 to Tails_2.9.1

#12 Updated by nukk about 1 year ago

I'm willing to write the documentation if it got into 2.6 (i'm not running it yet, but will shortly), just need a pointer to what to do.

#13 Updated by sajolida about 1 year ago

Thanks for the offer. This didn't go in 2.6 and will have to wait until 2.8 (2016-12-13) so we have plenty of time :)

If you want to work on this, I recommend:

  1. Get an ISO image that has this feature implemented. Maybe from http://nightly.tails.boum.org/build_Tails_ISO_feature-5684-screen-locker/lastSuccessful/archive/.
  2. Test all of its aspects and take notes (and screenshots) about:
    • The interactions involved.
    • If other things have changed as a consequence of this feature.
  3. Come up with a list of everything that needs to be said or explained about this feature.
  4. See where all this could fit in our documentation.
  5. Share this draft plan with us.

Then I'll be happy to review it and once we agree on a plan, you can start writing the actual stuff. The preparatory work is the most important part and also the easy, technically speaking, because it doesn't involve learning ikiwiki, building the website, dealing with Git, etc.

I like this article which talks about a similar process: http://idratherbewriting.com/2015/01/29/writing-is-like-sorting-laundry-practical-advice-for-tackling-documentation-projects/.

#14 Updated by sajolida 11 months ago

  • Target version changed from Tails_2.9.1 to Tails 2.10

#15 Updated by anonym 11 months ago

sajolida, do you think it would still be an improvement to potentially ship the screen locker without user documentation? I'm mostly asking because I'm wondering if I should block the merge on this happening.

#16 Updated by sajolida 11 months ago

sajolida, do you think it would still be an improvement to
potentially ship the screen locker without user documentation?

Yes. Undocumented improvements are still improvements. The problem
rather lies on whether we are fine with building up a technical writing
debts by adding undocumented features (though we haven't been that bad
in the past about slight delays).

I'm mostly asking because I'm wondering if I should block the merge on
this happening.

If I understand correctly, the screen locker is planned to be in 2.10
(freeze beginning of January), so we still have plenty of time to
document this. Last time I tried (for 2.6) it ended up being unclear to
me whether the feature was 100% ready and I think I waisted some time on
testing and trying to understand something that wasn't.

So please tell me when it's 100% ready, where I can test it, and I'll be
happy to document it in the for 2.10.

#17 Updated by sajolida 9 months ago

  • Assignee deleted (sajolida)

#18 Updated by intrigeri 9 months ago

  • Target version changed from Tails 2.10 to Tails_2.12

#19 Updated by sajolida 8 months ago

  • Assignee set to sajolida

#20 Updated by sajolida 6 months ago

#21 Updated by sajolida 6 months ago

  • Assignee deleted (sajolida)
  • Target version deleted (Tails_2.12)

This won't happen in 2.12 again.

#22 Updated by intrigeri 6 months ago

  • Assignee set to segfault
  • QA Check set to Info Needed

Looks like next step is #10970#note-16.

#23 Updated by sajolida 6 months ago

#24 Updated by BitingBird about 2 months ago

  • Assignee changed from segfault to spriver
  • Target version set to 2017

Also available in: Atom PDF