4 ms·

Ah, that's fair. Still, assuming a lack of other sandboxing, running a keylogger is pretty trivial. It's not by default, as you put it, but an un-sandboxed app

Ah, that's fair. Still, assuming a lack of other sandboxing, running a keylogger is pretty trivial. It's not by default, as you put it, but an un-sandboxed application has enough access to your filesystem to perform tomfoolery and get your credentials. At that point, there's no need to start a terminal, you just load some shellcode in whatever process you control, and say goodbye to your data. As for sandboxing, well, you're right, although one could sandbox X11 if they wanted to. "X-on-X" is actually a thing, rarely used outside developing X, but I could see it being used for seamless sandboxing with some work. Work that, inevitably, no-one will actually do, so there's that ;)

cycloptic 6y ago
It actually is feasible to sandbox X11 in that way, I believe this is what security-focused distributions like Qubes and Whonix do. But yeah, it is essentially working around the problems with X11 and not really suitable for ordinary use. To me the real progress needed is that applications need to move to using sandbox-friendly APIs so they don't break when put in the sandbox, and moving to Wayland is a key part of that. Applications built around the X11 idea of always having full access to everything will need changes regardless of what sandboxing solution is in use.