AMD Radeon Linux Gaming Performance At Parity Between KDE Plasma 6.0 X11 vs. Wayland

[oiaohm]

can't test it now, wayland is uninstalled.

I'm just going off what people testing it in the past have found, e.g.

Was that even correct back then the answer is no it was not yet what you have pointed to as turned into a repeated myth.

There is a absolutely simple mistake. Does weston forbid changing permissions on the socket after it created it. The answer is absolutely no.

Yes read the very thing you quoted completely.

> ** ONE-TIME SOLUTION **
>
> After weston has launched:
>
> % sudo chmod g+w /run/shm/wayland/wayland-0

So you can start weston as root after it running change the socket permissions to let other users in.

Yes you can also do this as a normal user to let some other user access the wayland socket.

I very much doubt anything has changed since then, wayland is not just dead its full zombie.

And nothing has need to change since then because nothing was broken. Just you inability to read need to be fixed.

Yes this is a myth about wayland caused by people not being able to read complete thing and notice that all the weston developer says is when weston creates the socket it will be created X way. The weston developer never says the permissions cannot be changed after the socket is created and then the person reporting the problem had included that as work around.

[oiaohm]

mSparks why does X11 default to the fly down with it socket.

Yes wayland compositor normally default that only starting user can access then you have to set permission

Think about a system with you, cat, dog and rat(rat being the one you don't like).

X11 socket default when X11 starts you cat dog and rat can access the socket. Ok rat might not have Xauthority but any security fault in your X11 server and that does not matter.

Wayland socket default only you can access it. You can create a group containing cat and dog make the group of the socket the group of cat and dog then give group permission to access socket. See rat not given access at all yet now you cat and dog can access it.

This is not a case of wayland being wrong it a case that wayland starts with a more secure default and lets the user open it up.

[mSparks]

Was that even correct back then the answer is no it was not yet what you have pointed to as turned into a repeated myth.

by the founder and maintainer of wayland no less.

what a way to inspire confidence in wayland: tell us Kristian Høgsberg doesn't know what he is talking about...

rofl. keep digging.

[oiaohm]

repeated by the founder and maintainer of wayland no less.

rofl. keep digging.

mSparks why does X11 default to the fly down with it socket.

Yes wayland compositor normally default that only starting user can access then you have to set permission

Think about a system with you, cat, dog and rat(rat being the one you don't like).

X11 socket default when X11 starts you cat dog and rat can access the socket. Ok rat might not have Xauthority but any security fault in your X11 server and that does not matter.

Wayland socket default only you can access it. You can create a group containing cat and dog make the group of the socket the group of cat and dog then give group permission to access socket. See rat not given access at all yet now you cat and dog can access it.

This is not a case of wayland being wrong it a case that wayland starts with a more secure default and lets the user open it up.

The wayland developer never said what the person did as work around was wrong either. Go back and read the complete post. Note the sections of the prior author he did not delete. There is no need to dig for anything else the answer is straight in that post you quoted.

By the way Daniel Stone one of the other founders of Wayland also has clarified the rules many times over even before 2013. Who wrote the socket section of the Wayland protocol. You got the wrong author.

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=84817#c11

This is one of the most recent.

[mSparks]

By the way Daniel Stone

This Daniel stone?

https://youtu.be/RIctzAQOe44?si=x5JMbQJYnDvD-Zxg

rofl, keep digging.

[oiaohm]

This Daniel stone?

Yes that video Daniel Stone.

Look up the dates of when Daniel Stone in 2013 would have been doing presentations. You will find that Daniel Stone the one who did the security on the sockets

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=84817#c11

root users are not banned from using another user's Wayland socket. No-one is banned from using another user's Wayland socket. If you want to make it accessible to another user, then you can make the socket accessible to them. This is just like running 'xhost' in X11, or sharing your ~/.Xauthority.

I cannot stress this enough: you can run anything you want as any user. No-one is 'banned'. Please stop saying 'root is banned' because it is not true and never has been.

For all the code Kristian Høgsberg put into weston one of the parts he did not code was the socket code security stuff.

So your complete argument is based on case that Kristian Hogeberg was answering about something in weston he did code and did not have full understanding of. He did not write anything technically wrong. He did fail to include extra bits of clarity. The really early versions of weston did not permission lock the Wayland socket at all(this was Kristian Høgsberg code).

Your complete miss understand is based on something written by the person who only approve the code to merge. Not by the author of the code who understood how you are meant to use it. Good part is Kristian Hogeberg managed to write response with nothing in fact incorrect. Bad part is the way it written a person can read it the wrong way and presume it says something it absolutely does not.

mSparks sometimes asking a maintainer a question or believing the maintainers answer is how to get totally screwed over. Sometime you need the author of that code to provide completely correct answer.

[mSparks]

Yes that video Daniel Stone.

The video where he says in the first few minutes none of them know what they are talking about...

what a way to inspire confidence in wayland: tell us Not only does Kristian Høgsberg not know what he is talking about, even the founders think they are all useless...

What a way to tell us Wayland isn't dead, by highlighting the significant contributions being made by its founders

Daniel Stone (fooishbar ) 1 contribution in the last year, Reviewed 1 pull request in 1 repository (February 21, 2024)

keep digging.

[oiaohm]

mSparks last post by me you should not have done something in the last post that is in fact breach of term of service of this site so sorry i cannot respond to someone who does that.

[mSparks]

mSparks last post by me you should not have done something in the last post that is in fact breach of term of service of this site so sorry i cannot respond to someone who does that.

Which?
Quoting from

https://github.com/fooishbar

or

https://youtu.be/RIctzAQOe44?si=15Quzznh5vGjfgf1

Please keep digging, its really informative turning up the facts from fact checking your BS.

[anda_skoa]

The weston developer never says the permissions cannot be changed after the socket is created

I wonder why this would even need to be said.

Everyone who has a basic understanding of unix domain socket knows that it its file permissions can be changed.

If the owning group has file access permissions any member of that group can connect to it.
If it has world file access permissions any user's process can connect to it.