ElCanut@jlai.lu to linuxmemes@lemmy.world · 2 years agoOh no ...jlai.luimagemessage-square337linkfedilinkarrow-up11.83Karrow-down1113
arrow-up11.71Karrow-down1imageOh no ...jlai.luElCanut@jlai.lu to linuxmemes@lemmy.world · 2 years agomessage-square337linkfedilink
minus-squareBaut [she/her] auf.@lemmy.blahaj.zonelinkfedilinkarrow-up2arrow-down1·2 years agoX’ architecture is insecure. There’s no isolation between windows, and each process can spy on your input. That’s just one example. Wayland is necessary.
minus-squareExLisper@linux.communitylinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up3·2 years agoYet no known active exploits use this insecure architecture to cause actual harm. It’s just another FUD.
minus-squareBaut [she/her] auf.@lemmy.blahaj.zonelinkfedilinkarrow-up1·2 years agoI’d hardly call that an exploit. There’s no protection.
X’ architecture is insecure. There’s no isolation between windows, and each process can spy on your input. That’s just one example.
Wayland is necessary.
Yet no known active exploits use this insecure architecture to cause actual harm. It’s just another FUD.
I’d hardly call that an exploit. There’s no protection.