D1231: Add Remote Access interface to KWayland

[Roman Gilg]

subdiff added inline comments.

INLINE COMMENTS

> Kanedias wrote in remote_access_interface.cpp:206
> > Can a rogue client do it though? This would crash the server then?
> 
> Yes, I guess so... What would you propose? Should we send it only to first bound? Or last one?
> 
> P.S. Even more: this interface has no authentication/authorization at all, so any client can connect and steal our video buffers.
> Martin said that first version of protocol can go without it and we can readd it later (as with fakeinput protocol).

Only first bound like you do it now. Just remove the Q_ASSERT (and make sure `boundScreens.size() >= 1`, otherwise continue).

> no authentication/authorization at all

That's a generic problem yet to be solved on Wayland / the Linux desktop. This also correlates with the push to containerized apps. I would just want something like the permission system in Android, but there might be better solutions. It's a bigger project for sure.

Also see here for some early thoughts on it, which to my knowledge until now did not lead to anything more: http://www.mupuf.org/blog/2014/02/19/wayland-compositors-why-and-how-to-handle/

REPOSITORY
  R127 KWayland

REVISION DETAIL
  https://phabricator.kde.org/D1231

To: Kanedias, graesslin, davidedmundson
Cc: subdiff, ngraham, alexeymin, #frameworks, davidedmundson, plasma-devel, leezu, ZrenBot, progwolff, lesliezhai, ali-mohamed, jensreuterberg, abetts, eliasp, sebas, apol, mart, hein
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/plasma-devel/attachments/20171023/abb04eb5/attachment-0001.html>