On Tue, 24 Jul 2018 15:10:29 +0200 Dorota Czaplejewicz <dorota.czaplejew...@puri.sm> wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Jul 2018 18:15:32 -0400 > Simon Ser <cont...@emersion.fr> wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > Sorry for the delay. > > > > I'm not sure I like this new design. > > > > Finally, I'm not even sure this security mechanism belongs here. I think > > adding > > this mechanism to potentially all privileged protocols will result in > > duplicated > > code and "pollutes" protocols. Here are some other solutions: > > --- snip --- > > * Allow other clients to use this interface too, and use another protocol to > > manage authorizations. Basically the idea would be not to expose this > > interface, and require the client to request access to this privileged > > interface through an authorizer protocol. Someone already mentioned it, > > this > > is Orbital's approach [2]. This allows the compositor to spawn a dialog > > asking > > to the user "do you want to allow <client> to create a virtual keyboard?". > > > > What do you think? > > > I'm in favor of option 3, which will be useful for other protocols as well, > which are not necessarily in position to be kept in a permanent privileged > process, e.g. screen recording. > > It would also make me happier as a protocol author, because the protocol > becomes more compact and easier to maintain without explicit managing. > Thinking a bit more about the topic, this patch with the authentication features removed would end up exactly the same as patch v3. Patch v3 is already implemented in wlroots too. Hereby I withdraw this update. Please refer to 20180622152045.10563-1-dorota.czaplejew...@puri.sm which can be read here: https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/wayland-devel/2018-June/038629.html Regards, Dorota Czaplejewicz
pgp9OHD4KwGO7.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ wayland-devel mailing list wayland-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
