Conference noted::hackers_v1

    Idle process killers have their purpose if written with the right
    intentions.  If you should write one, then make it sensitive to
    resources.  Have ti only "activate" process deletions once signifigant
    resources have been exhausted.  For this, to be done you really
    NEED to know your system workload.  
    
    You can't just go and say, if I am low on the free list, then start.
    In such a circumstance, VMS can't do its thing and try and trim
    workingsets.  Such is one example...
    
    The benefit to idle process killers is in that they "$delprc" idle
    process'.  In the environement I was in, all these were fully priv'd
    (read SETPRV, talk about MAJOR headaches).  Leaving these terminals
    logged in without anyone tending to them was with out a doubt a
    serious security infraction.
    
    So, weigh out the PROs and CONs.  Note, that if they are used to
    it, try and keep it around.  Why?  System Managers will all agree
    that users generally hate change.  If you remove it, then find a
    resource problem, and put it back, and forth, and ad nausium they
    (the user community) will be a bit upset.
    
    Oh well, that's my 2� worth,
    -- Nestor
    
    

    Remove it. See 519.14 for my frothing-at-the-mouth on the subject.
    
    	Jon

    	I have done enough foaming at the mouth too about this, and
    I would not install one.
    
    	However, since idle process killers are a poor substitute for
    user education, and you have the idle process killer, it probably
    means you do not have the user education.
    
    1) Provide an announcement (mail is better than sys$announce) to
    all users saying that SPIRIT will be removed from a certain date.
    
    2) If it seems appropriate, organise a meeting to explain why.
    
    3) Try to find out whose processes it is still deleting, and talk
    to them individually. Maybe SPIRIT keeps a log to tell you which.
    
    4) Remove it on the date.
    
    5) Watch the system to find idle processes, walk round to talk to
    the users involved (this works very well if you get in early one
    morning). Log their terminals out if you can do it without them
    hitting you.
    
    6) If you are reasonably sure you have backing from your manager,
    then start penalising persistant offenders. Non-privileged users
    have their base priority reduced, privileged users have their accounts
    disabled, original status to be restored on request from their
    managers.
    
    
    	Don't just remove the poor substitute without providing the
    real thing.
    
    			Dave
    

    ... but if your user community is anything like mine was, you will
    find a lot of users got used to never logging out - "Why should
    I logout when I go home, SPIRIT will take care of it for me".
    
    The suggestions in .3 were good, I think you will need to do some
    re-education of your users.

    Thanks for the valuable suggestions. They have more or less clarified
    for me the strategy I will take. My own inclination was to remove
    it, but I suspected that in itself would cause problems. You've
    highlighted some of them for me. Thank you.
    
    SPIRIT will be removed from this cluster in 2 or 3 weeks, to an
    accompanying flurry of mail messages to @ALL and notices in the
    (newly created) system news notes file.
    
    Nigel

    not to beat a dead horse into the ground, but I found out that our
    cluster has a proces killer... how?  I got this in the mail::
    
    ---------- 
    Hi, 

    Yesterday your process was terminated by the idle process monitor after
    two hours of inactivity. 

    This represents a security risk if you were not at or near your
    terminal during the two hours of inactivity.  The LOCK function of the
    terminal server can be used if you are going to be away from your
    terminal for a short while. This is the only acceptable alternative to
    logging out and should only be used if you are going to be away from
    your terminal for less than 30 minutes.  Other lock type command files
    or programs should not be used.  If you need help using the LOCK
    function of the terminal server then call the computer room at XXXX for
    assistance. 

    Call the computer room at XXXX if you are experiencing problems with
    any of the systems or the terminal servers.  The operators will refer
    your problem to the appropriate person so that it can be fixed. 

    When you leave for the day you should type LOG at the Local> prompt.
    This will terminate any other sessions that you might have going. 

    ------- 
    
    now, until then, I wasn't sure if we were actually running one,
    as I've only been here 2 months...
    
    as it happens, it was a secure terminal (i used the LOCK feature on the
    terminal server, like any good mis drone), and would have been back in
    time to prevent the two hour inactivity if my meeting hadn't went from
    20 minutes to 3 1/2 hours.... 
    
    the question is this:: do people consider the above message an
    'effective' way to gain user education, or at least user awareness?? I
    have no problems with the system we are running now, if in fact it
    does send a mail message every time it stops your process... 
    
    what do people think??  is this an acceptable way to act?
    
    rocko

    I've only been working here for a bit over 2 months as well and
    I usually have a pretty good Idea when I have left my terminal
    for more than the prescribed 30 minutes (with the weinie lock on,
    of course) The mail is sorta like rubbing salt in the wound,
    especially after a meeting that ran %500 over.
    
    I got dumped by secure-pack a few times, (when it was running)
    but haven't yet received the nasty-gram you did.  If I did, I'd
    be pretty inspired to write my own version of an idle process killer
    for my own process's.  I dont really need the nasty mail, nor the
    cc: BOSS that undoubtable follows it..
    
    Robb