>>92186128
>Security hole.
>every week

List them

No one ever gets hacked.

File: 1679226853834.png (1.87 MB, 2000x1000)

1.87 MB PNG

>>92186128
>muh security
Kill yourself waytard

File: Red_Hat_Logo_2019-en.svg.png (21 KB, 1280x303)

21 KB PNG

>>92186128
>mug X11 security
I wonder who could be behind this post

I see Red Hat shills are working overtime

>>92186128
post this week's discovery

>>92186128
there is no alternative

it will soon be over, when color management finally drops in a year or so even the most diehard fans will find it hard to justify continuing to stay on x

>>92187474
color management is relevant to 1% of users

>>92186128
Wayland doesn't work so I'm sticking with X. If support is dropped for X then I switch to Windows because at least drinking Microsoft's cool aid leaves me with a usable desktop, drinking Redhat's doesn't.

>>92186128
just like your mom

>>92187474
I will never use wayland because there is no such thing as a wayland desktop, there is a gnome/kde/wlroots/weston/gamescope/etc desktop and as a developer you have to target each one. If you write software that actually matters then you need to write at least 4 different versions of your code to make sure that it works on "wayland". This is not the case with x11. With x11 you write once and it works everywhere, for decades.

>>92187474
you are forgetting freesync as well. wayland doesn't have any proper freesync support.

sway works out of the box bitch, but the fractional scaling is shit, have a good monitor for that you fucking bitch

>>92186128
If Wayland would work just as well as X does, I would have switched already. But it doesn't. And I can't transfer my setup over to Wayland either.
Fix your shitty "protocol" or fuck off.

don't run it as root
problem solved

>>92187997
you will shift sooner or later bitch

>>92187474
Wake me when Wayland adds support for running without a compositor.

>>92187997
>I can't transfer my setup
have you tried not being tinker tranny

>>92188054
not your alarm bitch
your ass needs a good spanking

>>92188070
>have something that works
>"nooo! you need to move to the current thing!"
>but my stuff won't work there.
>"you HAVE to!"
>why? no.
>t-tinker tranny.... *sniff*"

>>92188101
sorry for your retardation, but for normal people, like me, switching to Wayland means choosing different option at login and that's it everything works
I added some custom options to .desktop files for some programs to force native Wayland but things work on Xwayland as well

>>92187813
non-sRGBy content and displays are becoming more and more common and you can't properly take advantage of that on X

File: file.png (348 KB, 492x678)

348 KB PNG

>>92186189
howly shit, source me that gnu-girl

>>92187474
>soon be over, when color management finally drops
oh shit, IT CAN'T EVEN DO THAT?
LMAO

>>92188369
go finger your mom's clit

>>92186189
Who makes these. (S)he needs help

>>92188392
>>92188369
https://booru.eientei.org/posts/353?q=gnu-chan

d-d-dont use winblows guys use linux no virooses
n-n-w use gayland guys because my secooority
fucking schizo troons need the bullet.

>>92188281
Consumer HDR sucks. We don't care.

>>92187997
This, and it forces compositing and desktop effects in my Fedora KDE spin. I'm perfectly fine with x11.

>>92186165
They're usually exploits that require root access. Retards just like to seethe.

>>92187474
It's hilarious how there's still no color management protocol for wayland.

>>92186165
https://lists.x.org/archives/xorg/2023-February/061255.html
https://lists.x.org/archives/xorg/2023-January/061244.html
https://lists.x.org/archives/xorg/2022-December/061229.html
https://lists.x.org/archives/xorg/2022-July/061035.html
>>92188478
Wrong!
>All theses issues can lead to local privileges elevation on systems where the X server is running privileged and remote code execution for ssh X forwarding sessions.

>>92188884
>remote code execution for ssh X forwarding sessions.
Would you kindly share with the class what you need to get ssh X forwarding?

>>92189110
I've seen countless /g/tards say they need muh X11 network transparency.

>>92189187
Didn't answer my request. Besides you can use trusted forwarding (-Y) if security is a requirement.

>>92189375
>trusted forwarding (-Y)
Doesn't fix any of the security holes.

File: 1645511808338.webm (278 KB, 640x432)

278 KB WEBM

>>92188392

>>92187474
Msg me when they drop forced vsync

>>92189745
Message me when you have a non-meme reason to turn off vsync

>>92188884
>where the X server is running privileged
rootless X has been a thing for ages, not my problem some tards are lazy
plus X11 forwarding works best on local networks anyway and using it over the internet is dumb

>>92189775
>your protocol doesn't have a basic feature that works in x11
>UHMMM YOU DONT NEED TO DO THAT ANYWAYS

>>92189838
>Can't give a non-meme reason or explain why it's a basic feature
>"Look I just need it ok"
As expected

>>92189853
>>"Look I just need it ok"
Entirely valid reason. Devs do not decide use cases, users do.

>>92189864
That's false. How would your feature be developed if no devs decided to write it?

>>92187963
>you are forgetting freesync as well. wayland doesn't have any proper freesync support
Wayland is a protocol for communications between clients (application) and display server. How exactly this "support" on protocol level should look, could you please elaborate?

>>92189900
why would the software be written in the first place if it's not going to have users?

People care about exploiting X. Unlike Wayland.

>>92189797
>>92189797
>rootless X
It can still crash the server with rootless X
>plus X11 forwarding works best on local networks anyway
I'm sure you'd love it if the X11 developers used that excuse to avoid fixing security holes

Has anyone from personal experience been exploited or hacked by X11?

>>92189959
Do you believe we should wait until someone is hacked before fixing security holes?

>>92186128
Wayland is still not working

>>92189982
I believe you should switch to Xenocara and get on with your lives
(nta)

>>92189853
seems like any answer someone would give is a "meme answer" so you're not interested in a good faith conversation on the topic anyway

>>92189959
My sister was. She was using family computer with Linux installed when malicious actor (me) used userspace keylogger to steal her social networks credentials. You can't imagine how many intimate media data he obtained.

>>92190016
Not a solution, Xenocara was vulnerable to all the security holes previously mentioned

>>92189939
>It can still crash the server with rootless X
an order of magnitude less severe
>I'm sure you'd love it if the X11 developers used that excuse to avoid fixing security holes
xorg is maintained by the wayland devs, anon

>>92190074
>an order of magnitude less severe
Still a security hole
>xorg is maintained by the wayland devs
Who actually fix the security holes rather than making excuses

>>92190037
>requires root to exploit
Hilarious

>>92190095
No, read it again

>>92189959
Of course not. And I've been using X in some form at home, work or school for over 20 years.

see why the admin of /g/ wants stable diffusion off his board? threads like this

>>92190118
Better read this instead https://github.com/Aishou/wayland-keylogger

>>92190123
Nice, I've been using Windows 98 for 25 years and I've never been hacked. I do have these weird toolbars in my browser though, where did those come from?

>>92190173
If you have to start implicitly accusing or insulting people like this, you have already lost the argument.

>>92190146
>This shit again
To deploy that keylogger you need to already have local privilege escalation. Guess what is a local privilege escalation? Those X11 security holes. They can be activated through XWayland. That's proving the point how X11 just makes everything it touches less secure

>>92189922
It's already written
>>92190017
Try me

>>92190094
>All theses issues can lead to local privileges elevation on systems where the X server is running privileged
lying retard
>Who actually fix the security holes rather than making excuses
ok then whats the issue

>>92190194
Which accusations and insults?

>>92190293
>lying retard
No, a DoS attack vector is a security hole
>ok then whats the issue
It's an attack vector

>>92190218
You think wayland resists keylogging if the hacker had root privileges?

>>92187813
X.org is relevant to 0% of users

>>92187841
X hasn't been a usable desktop in years

>>92187939
Works for me senapi, Qt is write one and works everywhere

>>92187963
Freesync needs proper support in the kernel before Wayland can support it

>>92188439
Professionals still need it

>>92187997
>>92188054
>>92188101
>>92188452
>Create a teetering stack of cards attached together with tape and safety pins
>Get mad when it's about to fall over
Your fault

>>92188767
There's also no proper color management protocol for X and there never will be because X can't do it without breaking protocol, Wayland at least has a working prototype for it

>>92190355
welcome to the wonderful world of public-facing services! if you can't handle it then keep it local

>>92190364
It does, you can't get root in wayland because your apps are sandboxed

>>92190415
you people are actually stupid as fuck holy shit.

>>92190173
You got lucky then, because I have been a victim of Windows security flaws. I can't say the same for X. Doesn't mean it can't happen. But it does call into question the value of throwing out the entire system.

>>92190393
Or even easier, remove it from the system

>>92190456
why?

>>92190452
Can you think of a reason why that would be despite X historically having lots of security holes?

>>92190456
if you want to do that then provide a real alternative and not gayland.
i'd gladly consider a more secure display server with network capability, especially one that isn't hard dependent on slow as ssh. but these projects are niche and in their infancy. what we got instead was a fundamentally misguided project run by autists

>>92190432
Nice arguments. Explain how a sandboxed app is going to get root without a local privilege escalation exploit

>>92190496
Every alternative is going to be similar to Wayland. The only reason you hate Wayland is because it's a huge project to replace X and it's taking a long time

>>92190505
Explain the same for X. Do you think app sandboxing doesn’t work in X or something?

>>92190531
>Every alternative is going to be similar to Wayland.
wrong, arcan is a real display server for example
>The only reason you hate Wayland is because it's a huge project to replace X and it's taking a long time
wrong, but honestly even if you were right, it'd be a valid reason to hate it, it's a fucking embarrassment to FOSS

>>92190545
>app sandboxing doesn’t work in X
For the 10000000th time, that's correct. It doesn't. No, running all your apps in Xephyr isn't a solution, it's a hack that fucks up a lot of other things worse than Wayland does

>>92190531
Any project that generates this much ire from their users deserves a critical eye.

>>92190623
I really don’t think you understand how Linux works, mate.

>>92190625
No, mentally ills on /g/ will get angry about anything

>>92190647
All the sandboxing won't save you when the protocol requires keylogging

>>92190623
>No, running all your apps in Xephyr isn't a solution, it's a hack
a hack that works is a hack

>>92190658
What exactly is the point of a developer if their work makes their users hate them?

Is the user wrong or the developer? What is the exact point of the software if the user hates it?
You are why open source is such a shit show.

>>92190684
Not an issue if your X is set up properly.

>>92188049
>>92188070
>>92190381
I bet you niggers have to tinker more with Wayshit and your 6 gorillion Gnome extensions to make this joke of a desktop environment usable, than I have with my boring, just werks WM setup.
Dilate harder you fags. If you want to replace old shit with new shit, than make sure your new shit is actually better than the old shit.

>>92190607
>arcan is a real display server for example
Not a real display server. I've heard /g/ shilling this for years and never seen anyone actually use it
>wrong
Prove it
>it'd be a valid reason to hate it, it's a fucking embarrassment to FOSS
Well that settles it. You've convinced me. FOSS developers should just pull millions of lines of working code out of their ass instantly in one second. If they don't then it's a valid reason to hate them

>>92190687
It doesn't work
>>92190711
There's no way to set it up properly without breaking some X clients

>>92190768
> Well that settles it. You've convinced me. FOSS developers should just pull millions of lines of working code out of their ass instantly in one second. If they don't then it's a valid reason to hate them
It’s their fault since they stopped working on the millions of lines of code that worked.
Self inflicted issue. I have no pity for them.

>>92190792
> There's no way to set it up properly without breaking some X clients
Wrong

>>92190768
>I've heard /g/ shilling this for years and never seen anyone actually use it
until 2 years ago i didn't see anyone using wayland either
>Prove it
not how burden of proof works
>FOSS developers should just pull millions of lines of working code out of their ass instantly in one second.
ah yes because 14 years is basically one second
do you expect people to be thankful for wayland or something? no one is gonna suck your cock for a shitty garbage toy that faggots have tried and failed to force onto them.

>>92190692
>What exactly is the point of a developer if their work makes their users hate them?
>What is the exact point of the software if the user hates it?
Mentally ills on /g/ will hate developers no matter what they do
>Is the user wrong or the developer?
The user. By definition, users don't know anything about the code. If they knew how the code worked they would be a developer
>You are why open source is such a shit show.
No that would be you, stop being entitled believing you deserve to get perfect software for free

>>92190820
All X11 developers say you're wrong

>>92190861
>the user is wrong
Found the stinky pajeet
>>92190888
You mean the wayland developers? They have vested interests in me believing X is broken so they aren’t exactly trustworthy here.

>>92190806
Except those millions of lines didn't work
>>92190831
>until 2 years ago i didn't see anyone using wayland either
That's 2 years it has over your fake display server
>not how burden of proof works
It is actually. Prove it
>ah yes because 14 years is basically one second
You've convinced me again. Developers should invent a time machine, go back to 14 years ago and instantly pull the millions of lines of working code out of their ass 14 years in the past so the future changes and the code is instantly available now
>do you expect people to be thankful for wayland or something?
Yes. You are a beggar. Any FOSS code is free trash you pulled out of Bill Gates's trash heap. No exceptions. You will try to deny this but you know it's true

>>92190990
> Except those millions of lines didn't work
Very interesting claim consider I’m using them as we speak. Works on my machine.

>>92190990
>You've convinced me again. Developers should invent a time machine, go back to 14 years ago and instantly pull the millions of lines of working code out of their ass 14 years in the past so the future changes and the code is instantly available now
holy fuck lmao, the cope is unreal here
no one ITT is going to change their minds on wayland being a joke, get over it

>>92191023
It’s honestly hilarious because you can tell this anon hasn’t developed anything in his life.
He’s a FOSS groupie. What a strange position to take.

File: puffy.png (119 KB, 445x445)

119 KB PNG

>>92190990
>Wayland shill hates FOSS
Why am I even surprised? Go back to Windows, nigger.

>>92190898
They're the same people. The X11 developers stopped developing X11 and started developing Wayland for that exact reason

File: lol.png (925 B, 128x78)

925 B PNG

I find it funny how OP is trying to single-handedly generate enough shill traffic to flood other posts shitting on him with no end in sight

>>92191054
So why should I trust their opinion? It’s clear they got tired of maintaining a piece of software and want more clout by claiming they are creating the replacement for that software.

Meanwhile, Wayland still feels like a straight jacket to such a degree that using winblows or aplel feels more free. The writing is on the wall with the real drive behind Wayland, and I don’t like it.

So no thanks, I’ll stick with X. Try again in 10 years when wayland has its shit together.

>>92191015
>Works on my machine
You know this is a meme right?
>>92191042
>>92191043
Two posts 7 seconds apart, one is accusing me of hating FOSS the other is accusing me of being a FOSS groupie. You people couldn't be stupider if you tried. For the record I don't hate or love FOSS. I use it when it makes sense. WSL2 has working Wayland support, it works better than anything you could come up with

>>92191122
Both posts are correct. Your belief in what FOSS means isn’t real FOSS. You are a groupie.

You spend your time doing damage control for a project that enjoys shitting on their users when their users make feature requests.
It’s doomed, just give up. No project can survive with such toxicity towards the people they depend on.

>>92191122
>WSL2
The larping Winfag finally reveals himself.

>>92191170
That's a whole lot of projection coming from someone who spends their time doing damage control for a dead project where it's impossible for any feature requests to ever be honored

>>92191209
If someone would rather use a dead project, that was already borderline-obsolete when it was still alive, than your project, maybe you should blame yourself for that and not them. Just a thought.

>>92191198
No larp. FOSS shills break shit, Microsoft fixes it. That's the way of the world

>>92191209
I spend my time finding pajeets on /g/ to bully them for being low IQ.

>>92191104
>Why should I trust the opinion of the developers of the current software that I am using and I say it's good
Did you think about this at all before you typed it?

>>92191237
>FOSS shills break shit, Microsoft fixes it.
Oh man, this has to be bait. It's too funny to be genuine.

>>92191258
someone doesn’t know what ulterior motives means.
It’s sad that pajeets are so easy to manipulate.

>>92191231
>maybe you should blame yourself
No sorry, your mental illness is your doctor's responsibility

>>92188429
This. Just use windows and Visual Studio. The NSA has got your ass in a list anyway

>>92191267
>The developers of the current software that I am using and I say it's good are actually evil with secret evil motives. No I don't have a source for this just believe me ok?
Did you think about this at all before you typed it?

>>92191299
Who said anything about good and evil?
Rajeet you’re letting your schizophrenia sprout up again. Take your meds.

>>92191262
Read em and weep shill.

https://www.zdnet.com/article/top-five-linux-contributor-microsoft/
>an analysis of Linux 3.0 contributors reveals that Microsoft was the fifth largest corporate contributer to Linux 3.0.

https://cloudblogs.microsoft.com/opensource/2016/11/17/microsoft-joins-linux-foundation/
>Microsoft has joined the Linux Foundation as a Platinum Member.

https://www.techrepublic.com/article/why-microsoft-and-google-are-now-leading-the-open-source-revolution/
>Microsoft’s open source contributions dwarf those of every other company on the planet

>>92190025
Did you fap to her nudes?

>>92191334
So now you agree they don't have evil motives? You need to take your meds.

>>92191426
Does ulterior mean evil in India?

>>92191377
>https://www.zdnet.com/article/top-five-linux-contributor-microsoft/
All of the Linux kernel code they contribute is for Hyper-V. They have never contributed anything else to it, ever. This is not even a controversial statement, MS openly states that this is their prerogative.
If you don't use Hyper-V (or Windows) you do not benefit at all from MS's Linux kernel code.
>https://cloudblogs.microsoft.com/opensource/2016/11/17/microsoft-joins-linux-foundation/
Nobody cares about the Linux Foundation, especially not freetards.
>https://www.techrepublic.com/article/why-microsoft-and-google-are-now-leading-the-open-source-revolution/
Microsoft doing shit like making .NET FOSS is nice and all, but irrelevant to this discussion.

>>92191479
All I see here is cope.

>>92191475
Yes, it also means that in most other countries. Lying is usually seen as morally wrong

>>92191551
I accept your concession.

>>92191647
And Bill Gates accepts your concession every minute of your life

File: wayland.png (13 KB, 256x247)

13 KB PNG

>>92186128
>will never be a real display server

File: 010 privacy rave.gif (687 KB, 1518x846)

687 KB GIF

My operating system has security baked in!

The simple fact of the matter is that the problems Wayland aims to solve (Screen tearing, giving developers a shiny new toy) aren't problems users care about having solved. That's why it's been coming real soon now for well over a decade.

File: file.png (2 KB, 173x44)

2 KB PNG

>when you run out of arguments

>>92192653
see >>92191551

>>92192448
Users do care about it. You don't speak for all users

>>92192700
"users" don't even notice 4:3 being stretched into a widescreen aspect ratio. They have no idea what screen tearing is and can't see it if you point it out to them. And even the people who do know what it is have no reason to care about developers getting new toys. (that generally inconveniences, rather than benefits, users, after all)

>>92192415
> My operating system has security baked in!
Yes so secure that you can't even launch applications if the telemetry server of apple is down.
https://sneak.berlin/20201112/your-computer-isnt-yours/

>>92192845
Then they won't care which one they use. They're fine with the default

>>92192291
Wayland is explicitly designed to not be display server

>>92190381
This is, of course, a lie. Xorg has supported ICC profiles since, I believe, the early 2000s.

>>92186189
tpbp

>>92193092
>Xorg has supported ICC profiles
This is of course, a lie. The "support" for profiles is another bad hack that doesn't work correctly

>>92189939
so the difference between X and Wayland is that X needs a security vulnerability to crash. got it.

>>92193150
No X has plenty of crashes without that, just ask anyone with an nvidia card

>>92193111
Try not lying for once in your life.
https://www.burtonini.com/computing/x-icc-profiles-spec-latest.html

>>92193111
you just call any code outside the wayland repos "bad hack" and suddenly we're supposed to ignore the hundreds of thousands of working deployments over decades?

lol. lmao.

>>92193232
He doesn't even use linux. He's some mentally ill macfag as admitted in another thread.

>>92193185
ah, nvidia cards. wayland's kryptonite.

>>92193092
1. that's not enough and
2. the implementation sucks
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/pq/color-and-hdr/-/blob/main/doc/winsys_color_pipeline.rst#x11-color-pipeline

>>92193219
Those profiles are just a hint. They don't actually do anything without explicit support from the clients who can do anything and fuck up the profile if they feel like it

>>92193232
Not any code, just X11. Wayland has plenty of hacks too but their HDR implementation actually isn't a hack

>>92193248
>All anons are the same
Take your meds.

>>92193278
It's just missing some way communicate metadata. By the way, NVIDIA proposed this sometime in 2017 I think, but no one cared because gayland. I guarantee that whatever the waylandfags come up with, whenever it happens; just two more weeks, will be crippled and gimped in some way.

>>92193349
No, adding metadata will not solve any of the issues. Try actually reading the document

>>92190381
>X.org is relevant to 0% of users
It's relevant to us.
>Works for me senapi, Qt is write one and works everywhere
This includes X

>>92193391
>The X11 color pipeline is shown in Figure 1. In this model, the
display server is completely agnostic of any color management happening.
The display server's job is to stay out of the way while X11 clients do
all their color reproduction on their own, perhaps with the help of a CMM.
This is the way it should be. I'm not interested in the wayland model.

>>92190792
>There's no way to set it up properly without breaking some X clients
Apparently that's not an issue since Wayland breaks plenty of X clients.

>>92193448
No that's not the way it should be. Try actually reading the rest of the document where it explains why that model has problems

>>92190531
>Let me explain to you what you're thinking
Go back to OSX.

>>92193470
And now you're almost getting to reality: X clients were going to break anyway so the developers decided to go the full distance for Wayland

>>92193505
Nice arguments

>>92193476
The only actual problems it has are some redundant fields. His personal opinion that it's bad for clients to have control is nothing more than just that: an opinion.

>>92193548
No you're wrong. It causes very real issues with X clients fucking up the display

>>92193563
There are "no real issues"; this is just theoretical nonsense.

>>92193598
No, you're objectively wrong. Some X clients change the Randr LUTs, some change the profile hint, some use their own setting, some don't do anything, some try to guess what the LUT is based on other things, and probably more I'm forgetting. All of these methods are incompatible and stomp on each other's settings right now and if you try to change any of these in the X server then you break the rest of the clients. Giving clients more control solves nothing at all and it just fucks everything up worse

>>92193650
Just configure your shit properly and this won't happen. Again, not a real issue in the real world.

>>92186189
good lord, that is unreadable

>>92193665
You can't fix it with more configuration because the existing configurations are incompatible

>>92193710
>install multiple applications that manage color
>surprised that you might get weird results
again, this is just a (you) problem. Properly configure your system and this won't happen.

>>92193748
No, you're objectively wrong. The design of X11 is explicitly to allow random clients to manage color and many X clients do without warning you

>>92193774
>The design of X11 is explicitly to allow random clients to manage color and many X clients do without warning you
And as I've already said, there's nothing wrong with this. I'm sorry you struggle with the idea that programs can do things.

>>92193860
(You) just said there was something wrong with it because it was causing, in your words, "weird results". Don't give me this stupid cope shit

>>92192848
i sense your jealousy :-)

>>92193898
This is sophistry. The fault in that example does not lie with the model but purely with the user that doesn't understand what he's doing.

>>92194005
No, objectively wrong again. The user can understand what he's doing perfectly and still end up with a fucked display because a random client decided to do the wrong thing

>>92190990

I have met 0 people using wayland, 1 person using arcan, about 100 using X. Proves absolutely shit about merit. I've also fucked around with quartz, x11, wayland, mir and arcan myself.

It is all anecdotal and proves shit.

Mir was a better Wayland than Wayland (protobuf vs KRHs own-format not even capable of handling its dogshit line encoding and cerebral palsy level queueing, 64 bit numbers aren't a thing so DRM modifiers are packed into two 32-bit one like it is criminally retarded).

Technically Arcan is really really interesting and showing something that moves beyond NeWS. Enough for me.

>>92189375
-Y disables the extra security of -X.

>>92194036
Your personal opinion is not a fact. This is a concept you seem to have trouble grasping.
>a random client decided to do the wrong thing
The solution is either "don't use that client" or "fix the bug". Neither are real issues. Stop pretending grandma is going to die because you misconfigured your gamma.

>>92193774
nothing stopping Xorg from prioritizing who gets to do what. XAce did all the work, that Xorg didn't follow through can be fixed within the hour. It is not a protocol problem.

>>92194094
>Never met anyone who uses Ubuntu, Suse, Debian, RHEL, Fedora, etc
It was obvious you never set foot out of /g/ discords
>Mir
Died because of Canonical's shitty CLA, blame them
>le 64bit integer
This is the best criticism you can come up with? Lmao
>Technically Arcan is really really interesting
No, it's not interesting at all

Wayland isn't at the stage of having any kind of responsible disclosure and still just shitting the bed.

There are infinitely many memory corruption vulns in every Wayland compositor except >maybe< Smitthay and they get zero attention. Grep for UAF/use-after-free in git log for Mutter/Kwin/Wlroots. For 10+ years the use of LibFFT alone broke canaries making stack overflow vulns 'tutorial gets()' easy to exploit.

For 5-10ish years any client could ftruncate() the keymap in wl_seat to break input system-wide because they didn't know how descriptor passing worked. Wayland documentation on 'security' is just a 'TODO: something about authentication'.

>>92194124
>Don't use that client
Not an option if the user needs that app. At that point you might as well stop using any X clients and use Wayland
>Fix the bug
Not an option for many old clients that expect bug-for-bug compatibility
>Neither are real issues.
Objectively wrong and not my opinion

>>92194135
No, objectively wrong. You can't change Xorg without breaking some of those clients. Adding more blocks to Xace will break clients. It is a protocol problem, making those changes subtly changes the behavior of the protocol

>>92194236
And it's still more secure than X11

>>92194276
>Not an option for many old clients that expect bug-for-bug compatibility
This literally makes no sense at all lmao. Why did I waste my time on you again? go back to macOS

>>92194367
>Old client tries to color manage
>It doesn't work anymore because you "fixed" the bug
>That literally makes no sense!
Anon...

>>92194395
I guess your brain is just broken. The premise is that some client is wrong and doing the bad thing. Fixing the bug doesn't make it "not work anymore". The exact opposite happens. Time to go back.

>>92194425
Go back and read the thread again. You can't fix it without breaking other clients or without breaking the client itself. This is fundamental to the way X11 works, it's exactly what you asked for when you asked for clients to have "more control"

>>92194425
>>92194456
Also some clients can't easily be fixed such as closed source apps or ones where source code was lost. "Just fix the bug" isn't a valid solution for X clients. The server just has maintain ABI compatibility forever or random clients start breaking. In other words don't break userspace

>>92194456
>You can't fix it without breaking other clients or without breaking the client itself.
Except you can and you're just making up shit as usual in these contrived, imaginary examples.

>>92194542
This bit has literally nothing to do with X11. Do you think wayland doesn't also maintain ABI compatibility? You don't actually know anything about software and are just typing random words together.

>sudo apt install -y xorg ; startx
based

>>92194304
it isn't. X11 has (bad) authentication in the protocol. Wayland has >no< authentication. There isn't 'security' in the protocol and it doesn't define a privilege boundary to have the IDEA of security -- it is all >implementation defined<.

>>92194635
>Except you can
No you can't. If it were possible it would have been done by now. You are not smarter than every X11 dev
>Do you think wayland doesn't also maintain ABI compatibility
Yes in this case. Wayland doesn't have to maintain ABI compatibility with 1000 different broken and incompatible color management tools. They avoided that problem by waiting until they could develop a proper color management API

>>92194652
That's by design after observing X11 security was so bad it still needed external programs like ssh to have real security. There's no point to putting it in the protocol

>>92194723
There's no actual problem in the first place. It's all theoretical. You won't name a single concrete example.
>They avoided that problem by waiting until they could develop a proper color management API
When that protocol comes out (whenever it will be), wayland will have to maintain ABI compatibility with that if they move it out of staging. It's literally no different. Nothing is stopping any xorg extension from being bumped to a new major version. It hasn't been done since, again, none of these are real issues.

>>92194789
No. Just No as in "you don't make any fucking sense". SSH is used >the same< for Waypipe (which is comical because Wayland itself doesn't work over TCP/UDP at all). Neither Wayland NOR X11 provide confidentiality, integrity or authenticity for its transport. That's all that is.

no one even uses wayland after 25 years and wayland homosexuals are getting so fucking mad it's incredible. LOL

>>92195006
That's exactly what I said. Waypipe was created using ssh because they already knew that was the way to go, from experience with X11

>>92194979
>name a single concrete example.
See >>92193650
>wayland will have to maintain ABI compatibility with that if they move it out of staging
Which they will avoid because the API won't let clients fuck with the profiles of other clients
>It's literally no different
It's completely different, read the design doc again >>92193278
>Nothing is stopping any xorg extension from being bumped to a new major version
Plenty is stopping that. Old clients will not be updated to use that extension so will remain broken and will continue fucking up other clients. New clients that use the extension will still have to include code to try and manage old clients that don't use it, and will remain broken if an old client does the wrong thing. You can't just paper over all problems with X11 by adding more extensions, it doesn't work like that

>>92186128
>Muh security holes
>Almost no examples of alleged X11 exploits being utilized to compromise Unix/Linux systems at scale in a real world context
If you're that worried just use VNC and disable X forwarding. Or learn how to tunnel over a secure connection and don't send passwords in clear text, retard.

>>92195351
Do you believe we should wait until someone is hacked before fixing security holes?

>>92195174
You haven't given me a single concrete example of this "problem" (because it's actually something that happens in the real world). Until you do so, I'm not going to waste my time any further.

>>92195461
Already did, see >>92193650

>>92195461
not actually something*

>>92195468
No you didn't retard. You just made up some fantasy about X clients (they totally exist just trust me dude). This is your last chance, but you don't even use linux so how would you know?

>>92195497
Please learn to read, this is your last chance >>92193650

>>92195519
Bzzt, failed again. See you next thread.

>>92195533
Nice arguments

I admit, you're a funny fella, Wayland schizo. Because of your silly antics, i will now coompile all my programs to run exclusively under wayland-based compositor.

Have a pitty >>92186128

>>92190531
no i hate wayland because it's yet another
>new = good
>old = bad
project. worthless.

>>92195815
That's not what it is

>>92195847
Why are you replying to every single post ITT?
Are you getting paid by Red Hat per (You)?

>>92196127
>Why are you replying to every single post ITT?
Do you know what a conversation is?
>Are you getting paid by Red Hat per (You)?
Reminder X11 is also a Red Hat project

>>92196496
>X11 is also a Red Hat project
No wonder you're such an annoying little penis. You're completely deluded.

>>92196808
Nope
https://ossrank.com/p/2377-x-server

>>92196859
>started in 1999
go be black somewhere else

>>92188884
>July -> December -> January -> February
You said every week, this is 4 in the span of 7 months.

>>92188884
>a patch for this has been committed
I thought you said xorg wasn't maintained? Now it's maintained and bugs are being fixed? I'm sure wayland doesn't have any bugs; It's new so how could it have bugs lol.

>>92186189
What the heck is that image?

>>92193002
aka designed not to work at all except as a toy, but hey at least they finally removed mandatory vsync (only after valve forced the faggy devs to)

>>92199542
A bunch of mentally ill "people" made a website where they share cp and these horrible images it's called I don't even want to say its name.

>>92200108
They basically just scrape a site, take the most frequent nouns and add their retarded warped images to them. Yes they actually think they are smart. It's sad, but luckily they will all die.

>>92198430
Yes that is when they started using a modern source control
>go be black somewhere else
You literally think git existed in the 1980s
>>92199457
There are several bugs in each report
>>92199502
XWayland is maintained, security fixes are released as part of that

>>92200227
>XWayland is maintained, security fixes are released as part of that
Nice cope.

>>92200291
No that was the plan all along. Xorg is dead, XWayland is the only one that gets maintenance releases anymore. No new features will be added, only bug and security fixes

>>92200358
A quick look at the xserver history shows this is yet another lie since PRIME render offload support was added to BSD a few months ago.

>>92200415
This commit?
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/xorg/xserver/-/commit/5468123822bbe8cd0a0abe07bbbd3a9cb14ed2cb
It's a 2 line change to a build script

>>92190025
Post 'em or gtfo

>>92190173
Explorer 3 let those in, or Netscape, whatever it is you've been using for 3 decades.

>>92200513
And? It's a new feature.

>>92200624
No it's just toggling an existing Linux feature on BSD now that they have kernel support for it

X was created in 1984, in 1987 just three years since creation X11 was feature complete.
It's been standard since then
In 2004 the X.Org implementation was created, it was standard on Linux since then.
In 2008 (Only 4 years after X.Org was created and became standard) Wayland was created, Weston was created in 2012? (who cares lol)
Both are still being updooted. Wayland: 1.21, Weston: 11.0.1
Wayland is still under 1% Linux market share
It's patently obvious Wayland will never be viable.

>>92200795
>Wayland is still under 1% Linux market share
I kinda don't believe that since it's the default for GNOME, which is in turn the default on most major distros.

>>92200795
>X11 was feature complete in 1987
No, it had a very large number of extensions created in the years after that. You have to be delusional to believe it wasn't being updated at a similar pace to Wayland

>>92200795
15 years and they still haven't justified their existance. It's like ripgrep. What's wrong with grep, nothing just use this thing cuz I MADE IT.
>>92200840
Turns out the vast majorty of noobuntu users know how to switch to xorg when their software doesn't work.
>>92200858
List them
>extention
Weasel words, x11 is feature complete. Any software used today can be used then with minimal changes.

>>92200665
Wrong. This is how I know you are full of shit and have never seriously programmed anything. Adding a whole new, previously unused, platform to a codepath is a major change that will eventually necessitate a new major release. And indeed if you look at the latest tagged xserver release, you'll see that this is not in there. So basically, you lied again and were wrong. I know this is an anonymous imageboard, but don't you ever feel any shame from constantly basing all of your "arguments" on lies and half-truths?

>>92200899
>List them
Type this in your console to see all your X extensions

xdpyinfo -queryExtensions

>x11 is feature complete
No, not even close

>>92200971
They don't need to do a release, BSD has their own patches and release cycles. This is how I know you are full of shit and have never seriously programmed anything or use Linux or used BSD, ever

>>92200899
ripgrep has significantly better recursive search (handling ignore files, the -g flag, concurrency, --pre), some useful features grep lacks (e.g. -r, -M, -U, -z), better Unicode handling, better regex engine and better integration in more complex scripts (--json). It's also much faster. If anything, GNU grep is the one that still needs to justify its continued presence other than for compatibility.

>>92200899
>It's like ripgrep. What's wrong with grep, nothing just use this thing cuz I MADE IT.
fuck gayland but ripgrep is pretty nice. it's insanely fast so it feels snappy to use from an editor

>>92201005
Cool, you lied again. Freebsd is currently on 21.1.4 which is actually a bit out of date. They follow tagged releases like most distros.

>>92201100
>Cool, you lied again
Nope. It has their own patches
https://cgit.freebsd.org/ports/tree/x11-servers/xorg-server/files
I'm noticing every time you say I'm lying you're actually the one in the middle of telling a lie, is there something you want to tell me?

>>92201076
Wayland is the display server equivalent of ripgrep

>>92200973
X.Org extentions are not x11 extentions, nice try though. Thank you for playing.
>>92201076
They are the same exact speed, the only difference is that grep is a standard and ripgrep is a ripoff.

>>92201211
>X.Org extentions are not x11 extentions
Haha Cope

>>92201169
Pathetic. Freebsd has some patches (like many GNU/Linux distros do), but that doesn't mean they don't follow software release cycles just like every typical distro. The statement "they don't need to do a release" is still a lie.

>>92201228
I know it's difficult for waytards to understand but, x11 is a standard (waykiddies use the word protocol to sound like l33t hax0rs) X.Org is an implementation.

>>92200795
>It's patently obvious Wayland will never be viable
Viability does not matter, those in charge have chosen Wayland. Everyone will be forced to use it eventually.

>>92201282
There are no other viable implementations of X11 besides X.Org

>>92201259
>The statement "they don't need to do a release" is still a lie.
No it's not, they can just patch it like they already do. You can admit you were wrong now, you don't have to protect your ego here. You're anonymous

>>92201417
Please just stop. You don't develop software and it's painfully obvious. Carrying a handful of patches is not a substitute for new releases from upstream. Generally distros that are good citizens will try to get their patches accepted upstream. You can quickly glance at the history of that freebsd port and see that they do update the xorg server version just like any distro would.

>>92201553
>Carrying a handful of patches is not a substitute for new releases from upstream
It is when it's a two line patch. You obviously don't develop software when you think it's hard to apply a tiny patch, which they already do apply several of them. You can admit you were wrong now, you don't have to protect your ego here. You're anonymous

>>92201743
Whether or not freebsd decides to carry that patch (they currently aren't) doesn't change the fact that xorg-server will need to have a new release with that feature eventually. Learn how software works. This is a new feature, not a bugfix.

>>92201886
>This is a new feature, not a bugfix.
It's not a new feature, it's actually just a change to the buildsystem
>doesn't change the fact that xorg-server will need to have a new release with that feature eventually
That's not a fact. Who says it needs that? Nothing needs to have a new release. Much better FOSS projects have been abandoned without a new release
>Learn how software works.
No you learn, patches can be applied without a new release. New releases are convenient but they're not necessary

>>92202156
>It's not a new feature
Completely wrong. It's a new feature for BSDs. I'm not bothering with the rest of your drivel. Try telling the truth. It will make you a better person.

Someone explain the difference between x11 and wayland.

>>92205525
X11 works and Wayland doesn't.
Don't know why we argue about this everytime. Until Wayland becomes as problem free as X, it's not a good replacement.

File: e99.png (338 KB, 1398x683)

338 KB PNG

>>92186128
Haven't had a single problem with it.

File: 1679298421111.png (48 KB, 600x400)

48 KB PNG

>>92186128
You will never be a real display server. You have no hardware cursors, you have no xrandr, you have no setxkbmap. You are a toy project twisted by Red Hat and GNOME into a crude mockery of X11’s perfection.

All the “validation” you get is two-faced and half-hearted. Behind your back people mock you. Your developers are disgusted and ashamed of you, your “users” laugh at your lack of features behind closed doors.

Linux users are utterly repulsed by you. Thousands of years of evolution have allowed them to sniff out defective software with incredible efficiency. Even Wayland sessions that “work” look uncanny and unnatural to a seasoned sysadmin. Your bizarre render loop is a dead giveaway. And even if you manage to get a drunk Arch user home with you, he’ll turn tail and bolt the second he gets a whiff of your high latency due to forced VSync.

You will never be happy. You wrench out a fake smile every single morning and tell yourself it’s going to be ok, but deep inside you feel the technical debt creeping up like a weed, ready to crush you under the unbearable weight.

Eventually it’ll be too much to bear - you’ll log into the GitLab instance, select the project, press Delete, and plunge it into the cold abyss. Your users will find the deletion notice, heartbroken but relieved that they no longer have to live with the unbearable shame and disappointment. They’ll remember you as the biggest failure of open source development, and every passerby for the rest of eternity will know a badly run project has failed there. Your code will decay and go to historical archives, and all that will remain of your legacy is a codebase that is unmistakably poorly written.

This is your fate. This is what you chose. There is no turning back.

>>92206057
>xorg
>more problem-free than sway
hearty kek

>>92189745
Didn't they do it because valve told them to?

>>92186128
let me know when wayland gets some real desktop environments

>>92206186
The contrast is horrible, please work on that.

>>92208029
Sway sucks.

>>92189775
My monitor has gsync

>>92208029
>sway
>problem-free
omega lul
Sway is the only display server on Linux that I've seen segfault for no reason on a regular basis.

File: 32DBA387-DBB0-4299-AF24-1(...).jpg (13 KB, 679x451)

13 KB JPG

>>92187474
>j-just give us 2 more years
>we'll fix all the issues like
>no hardware cursor
>forced vsync
>fucked vfr support
>no nvidia support
>xwayland bugs/perf penalties
>fucked color profiles
>TWO MORE WEEKS
This is why no sane person uses Linux on bare metal

>>92208195
Except people that don't want to be spied on by microsoft.
I.e. the competitors to microsoft.
Not just linux btw. Talking amazon here.

>>92208195
Ooooo peeetah

>>92208248
the amount of people unaware of privatezilla is astounding

>>92188164
>I added some custom options
Have you tried not being a tinker tranny? I've never needed to do that on x11

>>92208299
What bothers me most of all about freetardism is that everything on Linux is just painful to use. Doesn’t matter if it’s xorg or wayland. Linux is friction.

>>92186189
If Tails and Whonix are on the “onions” side, what alternative is there for the chad side? Qubes?