When I came to code my RADXIDE in Tcl/Tk indeed I found me in the doubt to stay or not at the hosting system game, or better if to choose to implement all the intecom subsystem. Well for me the final decision was easy: the intecom subsystem indeed was already coded but to protect my software (and to save me days of work in adaptation) I decided "to skip" on that.
Never to say, that a the opposite site an attacker can exactly have the opposite thought: "intriguing this intercom subsystem between applications, I want to take advantage on it!". > N0\/\/@r€Z > ---------- > /\/\@rk€T Feb 17, 2024 04:07:08 Nowarez Market <my2...@has.im>: > Hello, > > I need to say that most of the attacks I usually receive in Xfce are on the > file manager (Thunar) or on the console. > So the software most often open on my station. Do you think is it possible to > pay them a special "sandboxing" of > these software in addition to the underwood system protections of OpenBSD? > The most I care for "my friends", > crackers, is clearly about the window system management and for what is my > few knowledge of that part of the system > the underwood intecom system between windows and the framing window system > (mdi windows and relative window > access, disable / enable normal, modal access, etc). Indeed, what I lately > notice more often is their ability to freeze me > the Thunar windows frames and submodals. > > Thanks! > >> N0\/\/@r€Z >> ---------- >> /\/\@rk€T
