I tried T3slider's suggesting of moving (or deleting) /usr/share/applnk/System/ScreenSavers/webcollage.desktop. I saw nothing of webcollage for a couple days, but the raunch reappeared last night under "Random". It seems about one in ten of the images were body-part explicit.

Bourdieu: you suggest unchecking webcollage in the xscreensaver-demo list of screensavers. Where is this option located?

Thank you.

Question: Does webcollage present a security threat by scraping content off unscreened websites? What about jpegs that contain malicious code?

For now, screensaver is set for "Blank".

I had no idea I could get nudity as my screen saver if I pushed random ... how interesting! With the hundreds of screensavers available, I agree it is a little disconcerting to push random and get NSFW images, since you will rarely spend the time screening every one before use. I suppose two xscreensaver packages ("SFW" and "NSFW" flavours) would sort this out if there is more than just webcollage that causes NSFW issues.

However, in the meantime, how do you disable it? Well, bringing up xscreensaver-demo (try it from a console, it should give you a GUI screensaver menu thing) and selecting random gives me a big big list of screensavers with tickboxes. Untick webcollage and webcollage (Whacked) and you should be good to go.

Alternatively, a quick grep into my package log shows:

So you could remove the programs themselves from /usr/X11R6/libexec/xscreensaver/ if you want it absolutely and certainly gone.

Good luck, and "Suprise!"
- Piete.

Piete -- Thanks.

I renamed the programs, and that seems to do the trick -- when selecting screensavers, I get a blank screen when choosing webcollage (unlike previously, when the test screen would show stuff). So now I'm back to random.

Surprisingly, I had first tried doing the xscreensaver thing at the console. When the GUI configuration tool came up, webcollage and whacked were already unticked for random, yet webcollage still functioned.

Now I've got to do these changes on other people's machines.

The KDE desktop has its own independent screensaver front-end which can also call the xscreensaver modules directly. This is the one you configure in the kde control panel. Unlike xscreensaver-demo itself, there's no way to set which modules get included in the random selection via the UI, so it seems the only option is to delete the executables for now.

You'll also have to remember that you've done it. Should you update the package in future, you'll need to get rid of them again.


I'm also very wary of the security issues of this saver.

1) As you suggested, its possible that there could be another JPG handling vulnerability in the future. You'd have to be pretty unlucky to hit a compromised image, but all the same, why risk it.

2) You'll be poking holes through your firewall to go and fetch these images. And your IP address could be showing up in god only knows who's server logs.

3) Imagine if this thing found a server full of child porn. I'm not sure I'd like to rely on a defense of
"It wasn't me!... it was my screensaver that did it! officer."


No, all in all, I think it would be better if this module just went away.

Very good point, you have no idea what kind of pictures it might download or the legality of these pictures, even tho there is filtering there is no guarantee whatsoever that it will be effective. So, there's no kidding here, it's dangerous. I personally would never even think of making such a program, because I consider it too dangerous.

That's just IMO.

I'm going to use the BSOD screensaver - it's far superior to the Windows one (I've never had a real BSOD, so these screensavers make up for the disappointment).

Really ? You must be very lucky, I've had plenty, although they were less frequent with newer versions of Window$. Neat screensaver tho , better than the collage.

Yes, no real BSODs. I must have got a faulty XP Pro CD. "Hey Ballmer! My XPs too stable! Send me a normal one now!"

There is a way.

In /etc/profile.d, there is kde.sh, where the environment variable KDEDIR=/usr is defined. This is from the stock Slackware.

I added a script called kde2.sh (chmod +x). In that script I exported the environment variable KDEDIRLOCAL=/usr/local/kde-mods. I also added the environment variable KDEDIRS=$KDEDIRLOCAL:$KDEDIR. This latter variable defines the preferred order for KDE to use files when more than one with the same name exists in the two KDE directories. Therefore my *.desktop files in KDEDIRLOCAL have precedence.

My /usr/local file system is on a separate partition. In this directory I make modifications to KDE, which includes modified *.desktop files. By using a separate partition I always maintain my modifications whenever I update Slackware. I never have to worry about KDE *.desktop files getting clobbered during an update.

As a test I created a blank webcollage.desktop file in $KDEDIRLOCAL/share/applnk/System/ScreenSavers. The screen saver does not appear in the list in the KDE Control Center.

Yes, dangerous. The idea of the screen saver is technologically slick, but I believe the correct option should be to allow end users to opt in, not opt out. Especially for parents --- they should not have to worry about such things. Or unsuspecting employees who could get terminated from their jobs.

Additionally, I dislike the idea of any program on my computer going out to the web without my knowledge or consent. That is a bad idea. Next we'll see "phone home" apps appearing. Opt in for these kind of things --- always, not opt out. This desktop file should be in the Extras branch and not part of the stock installation.

If you do not like it, do not use it. That's it. I am against of complete removal of this screensaver from the Slackware distribution.

Many posts in this thread have outlined valid arguments for why this screensaver is dangerous. Your statement really doesn't seem to address anything. "If you don't like it don't use it" doesn't apply in this care and here's why:

KDE does not allow you to deselect web-collage from the set of modules used in random mode. If you want to not have it included you have to take manual action, either deleting the executables/files or doing something a little more elegant such as Woodsman explained above. (Very nice approach there Woodsy. Kudos!). If the KDE screensaver had the same functionality as xscreensaver-demo and allowed this individual saver module to be disabled by default then it'd be less of an issue (though still a danger). But it doesn't.

You'd also need to be aware of the danger, and most people won't expect there to be any danger just setting the screensaver to random.


If you really can't see the problem here then, here's a final example.

There was a news article a few weeks or so back about a large scale Linux/KDE roll-out across Brazil's school system. Putting aside the actual issue of young school children being show nasty images, can you understand the ramifications of this for linux or the distro itself. "Linux Computer in schools displays hardcore to 8 year olds!" is not a news headline I want to see anytime soon. Whether there'd be any legal consequences I guess would depend very much on the laws of the locale, but the impact on Linux's reputation and adoption would be huge, not to mention Microsoft's Marketing Division would wet themselves with delight.


Is Pat aware of any of this?

Nobody's talking about removing it. However it does need to be made an opt-in choice. Just selecting random should NEVER do something like that unless the user has made a conscious choice that they want those kinds of pictures.

Please read the responses and arguments, it seems you have not read them, or at least are not responding to them.

The problem is most people don't even know it's on by default, so they cannot choose to 'not use it' until it's too late.

As was said very nicely earlier, employees will get 'terminated' for this.

If you have a boss, I'm sure you can imagine him yelling at you:
"You're TERMINATED <insert your name here>. Pack up your s*** and get the f*** outta here !!!"
as a result of something like this screensaver, which I've seen happen for things much lesser than this screensaver.

I hope you will read at least this post.

EDIT:
I just remembered that in the US (and probably other places) you can actually get sued for something like this. I know at the library they had a sign that said if you view p0rn using the computers here and thus offend someone you can get sued and they can win a lot of money from you, and you may also face jail time for it.

wtf is this even being debated for... just take it out of the default set up until it is fixed... this is a no brainer ffs

I would think not, but the more attention this issue receives on this forum the more likely he will soon. I linked to this thread in the "What features/Changes would you like to see in future Slackware?" thread as this is obviously something to consider to be changed.