Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:not the point (Score 1) 327

by smash (#48929771) Attached to: Why Screen Lockers On X11 Cannot Be Secure

It has moved on in heaps of ways. Clients are far more powerful and capable of far more processing. 3d acceleration has become commodity. Compression, pixmap caching, etc. are now commonplace. Power consumption is a concern. Security is much more of a concern - bundling so much code into the X server, with the level of security access it has is a bad idea.

You just need to open your eyes and look at well... virtually any other GUI system from the last 10-15 years and see how most of them leave X11 for dead in terms of security, performance, etc.

The much vaunted "network transparency" of X11, the feature everyone whines that they will lose - is crap and done better by plenty of other software, from VNC to ICA to RDP...

Comment: Re:not the point (Score 1) 327

by smash (#48929247) Attached to: Why Screen Lockers On X11 Cannot Be Secure
The problem is that the core design of X11 was decided upon about 30 years ago and the computing landscape has moved on significantly. During the past 30 years, there have been thousands of hacks to add new functionality to existing code-paths which are no longer relevant to today's environment - but necessary to be "X11" compatible.

Comment: Re:Maybe if Adobe fixed their broken updater... (Score 1) 163

by lgw (#48929217) Attached to: Adobe's Latest Zero-Day Exploit Repurposed, Targeting Adult Websites

Just because the shady back-alley freeware does it, does not in any way make a good excuse for a AAA software vendor to do so

And AAA vendors don't. Adobe products are simply shady back-alley freeware as proven by their installer. Java too, of course.

To restore a sense of reality, I think Walt Disney should have a Hardluckland. -- Jack Paar

Working...