5 ms·
If I had to guess it's for screen sharing.
by wins32767 5y ago
If I had to guess it's for screen sharing.
- sithadmin 5y agoThis. It enables single-app share, instead of just capturing entire displays.
- akira2501 5y agoUnless I'm missing something.. all of the required information is available through the X11 protocol. Reading the command lines of the processes is unnecessary and provides data that isn't useful in the window sharing context.
- jraph 5y agoThis would not work on Wayland, though.
- bonzini 5y agoWayland is even more strict, you ask it for screen sharing and it gives you the stream. If the compositor doesn't support screen sharing you're out of luck, there's just no way to read the contents of a window. With X11 if the window manager doesn't have the relevant support you can always ask the server.
- mnd999 5y agoZoom doesn’t support screen sharing on Wayland, except through some propriety Gnome API. It also doesn’t run at all for me on sway, just crashes at startup.
- yjftsjthsd-h 5y agoHow would that work? I would expect it to enumerate X clients, not PIDs
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- _sgianelli 5y agoIf so that seems like a great place for someone like Apple or Microsoft to offer an API to bolster security and privacy
- thephyber 5y agoOS X already requires that the user open Settings and give the app elevated permissions to be able to share the screen. One can argue about the granularity, but you can’t argue that Apple hasn’t already done something.
- uoaei 5y ago"Doing something" seems like a really low bar when that "something" is basically useless for the intended use case.
- olyjohn 5y agoHonestly, I kind of agree with this downvoted post. The MacOS permissions prompts are starting to drive me apeshit. Average user is going to start ignoring them and just click yes to everything anyways. Just like everybody already does on their phones. Reminds me of when Windows Vista came out and they started prompting for permissions like crazy. Everybody hated it. Maybe it was just ahead of its time. I already granted this permission to Teams on my Mac. It's not malicious now, but when an update comes out in the future, it could be, and I've already allowed it. So this whole thing feels kinda dumb. Nobody wants to manage all this shit, and nobody understands it.
- Wowfunhappy 5y agoThey drove me so insane that I abandoned modern macOS entirely.
- NoPicklez 5y agoWhat's the solution then? MacOS is exposing how often these programs are requiring privileged access. The solution is partly for applications to limit their use of elevated privileges which we can't always rely on. Therefore MacOS is exposing and providing users with visibility and choice.
- tyingq 5y agoEnumerating window handles and titles would be more suited to that. It will need that anyway to share the window. On a multi-user system, it could see processes attached to displays it has no access to.
- puttycat 5y agoHow come the OS doesn't provide the list instead of each app enumerating all the proecesses itself?
- formerly_proven 5y agoYou're looking at the API. Also, screen-sharing can't be the reason, because X windows don't have anything to do with processes on the machine.