Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Threaded Input Finally Lands In The X.Org Server

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #11
    And it seems Xorg will stay for a long time , funny all that people saying wayland or mir would finally kill X but it seems X is getting better and better

    Comment


    • #12
      Originally posted by TheOne View Post
      And it seems Xorg will stay for a long time , funny all that people saying wayland or mir would finally kill X but it seems X is getting better and better
      It will continue being used for as long as every application being able to snoop on and manipulate other's input is considered acceptable.

      Comment


      • #13
        Originally posted by Bitiquinho View Post

        C11 Threads, actually. Unfortunately they're not implemented by the compiler, but in the library (libc) level, and the only libc implementation with support for it is the musl libc.
        Isn't C11 threads and wrap over pthreads? As I remeber I need to include pthreads libs when using C11 threads.

        Comment


        • #14
          Originally posted by TheOne View Post
          And it seems Xorg will stay for a long time , funny all that people saying wayland or mir would finally kill X but it seems X is getting better and better
          Work on the true hard limitations of Xorg has basically stopped (or moved on wayland/weston), these things are minor additions that won't change the fact that Xorg is obsolete crap that should have died 10 years ago with floppy disks.

          Comment


          • #15
            Do we even care about this now most distros use libinput anyway?

            Comment


            • #16
              Originally posted by CrystalGamma
              It will continue being used for as long as every application being able to snoop on and manipulate other's input is considered acceptable.
              That is a very valid issue, however its impact is zero when you don't run untrusted software. Why would you ever allow proprietary software on a computer that has internet access or important data on it? If you really need to game, use a separate computer.

              Comment


              • #17
                Originally posted by curaga View Post
                That is a very valid issue, however its impact is zero when you don't run untrusted software. Why would you ever allow proprietary software on a computer that has internet access or important data on it? If you really need to game, use a separate computer.
                It's easy to be safe! Just don't install virus!! DUH!!

                Compartimentalization exists because an application can be compromised (like say web browsers), so if it gets compromised the malware slams on a wall instead of taking control of the rest of the system.

                Comment


                • #18
                  It's easy to be safe! Just don't install virus!! DUH!!
                  On Linux, it really is like that. I have not seen one advanced virus, they are all trying default passwords on ssh ports, or installed by the users.
                  Compartimentalization exists because an application can be compromised (like say web browsers), so if it gets compromised the malware slams on a wall instead of taking control of the rest of the system.
                  Again, not a single POC that successfully delivers executable Linux code through a browser and executes it. Can you make JS that crashes the browser, or snoops on other tabs? Very likely. Can you make JS that includes x86 Linux code, and make the browser execute it? In such a way, that includes X11 calls to intercept keypresses to other apps? There's already several layers of protection preventing that, and for it to work, you'd have to have intimate knowledge of the target system, no general virus.

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    Originally posted by curaga View Post
                    On Linux, it really is like that.
                    On windows and OSX too. 99% of the infections happen because the user is a moron and opens mail attacchments from Appple.com.

                    But if safety stopped there, we would be safe also on XP. Which isn't the case.

                    they are all trying default passwords on ssh ports,
                    Yo, that's script-kiddie level and most pros move the ssh port to <random high number> just to keep that shit at a minimum. Servers get pwned due to vulnerabilities of the web frameworks.

                    I have not seen one advanced virus,
                    It means nothing, look for "<browser name> remote code execution" and you will find all holes you want.

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      Originally posted by curaga View Post
                      On Linux, it really is like that. I have not seen one advanced virus, they are all trying default passwords on ssh ports, or installed by the users.
                      Maybe it is because it is ADVANCE hence non detectable without advance techniques like anomaly detection ? Don't be childish open source is not equal to secure -- nice example is wordpress which is open source, widely used and it is hammered all the time by different attacks and "viruses" ... Every system can be broken, every one can write buffer overflow attack code (with 15 min on google), so if smth overflows your non-sandboxed browser it can execute any code it likes -- and I am quite sure it will not change your desktop background to "this is virus" so you can see it, it will just sniff your passwords and bank account data, so one day it can be used ...

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X