Comment by hwsrtejk
2 days ago
Absurd ideas like "applications shouldn't be able to spy on or manipulate each other without explicit permission from the user".
2 days ago
Absurd ideas like "applications shouldn't be able to spy on or manipulate each other without explicit permission from the user".
Wayland, traditionally, has not believed that. It believed "applications shouldn't be able to spy on or manipulate each other" and doesn't give users any mechanism to suggest that they might have permission to do so because the idea of that happening was just not on their radar.
I'm not sure about the modern state of Wayland but last time I saw it the situation was terribly messy and I was forced back to X11 because I rely on screensharing to do my job properly.
> I was forced back to X11 because I rely on screensharing to do my job properly.
Wayland screensharing has worked for a long time. I remember using it early in the pandemic when the entire working world seemed to move to Zoom/etc for meetings. So, at least ~5 years?
This is a great example of how horrible the situation is under Wayland.
Screen sharing sometimes works. Sometimes doesn't. For example: https://www.reddit.com/r/kde/comments/1ebwaz4/is_wayland_scr...
There are countless such threads. Something that always worked perfectly out of the box now has endless workarounds per compositor/desktop system that you use.
1 reply →
"There should be global hooks and applications should be able to register themselves should they wish" would solve all these cases, but horse blinders are also very important to wear.
I gave my explicit permission by choosing to run the software in the first place.
Nobody said anything about that. Is there any reason that Xorg couldn't tack on a permission system, other than that it would be inelegant?
> Is there any reason that Xorg couldn't tack on a permission system, other than that it would be inelegant?
That's the whole reason for Wayland's existence: such things were not "easily" possible...
Linux+Xorg desktop would be hopelessly insecure for ever because these security features were deemed too hard to the point of not being "worth it". So Wayland was started.
Someone is developing XLibre, and Xorg fork. It may be pulled off, but I doubt it. Making Xorg safe was tried many times for many safety-holes.
> Linux+Xorg desktop would be hopelessly insecure for ever
People keep repeating this claim over and over, but in nearly 30 years as a Linux user and tech news reader, I've seen exactly zero news articles about an epidemic of Linux keyloggers.
> Making Xorg safe was tried many times for many safety-holes
* citation needed
There were X11 extensions that implemented access controls, eg in TrustedSolaris.