Ullebe1

Nice appeal to authority. Are you referring to a formalised security model (of which I’d love to read more, if you have a link?), or the actual clipboard on your PC?

But not all interaction is equal. Access control and granularity of permissions is something X11 is sorely lacking in, which Wayland has built in. Which is why X11 is a bad fit for common treat models and Wayland is not.

Ohh, @LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com said so, so it must be true! I’ll let you keep believing that while I enjoy them and watch them grow in popularity and usage, just like Wayland.

Allowing any app unrestricted access to the input and output of any other app (like in X11) is a terrible security practice. It allows for trivially easy keyloggers and makes horizontal movement to other apps after the first has been exploited super easy.

Many people’s answer to this is “then just don’t run untrusted apps, duh”, but that is a bad take since that isn’t realistic for 99% of users. People run things like Discord or Spotify or games or Nvidia drivers all the time, not to mention random JavaScript on various websites, so the security model should be robust in the presence of that kind of behaviour. Otherwise everyone is just a single sandbox escape in the browser away from being fully compromised by malware installed with root privileges. Luckily we know better now than when X11 was designed and that is the reason for things like Bubblewrap (used in Flatpak for sandboxing), portals and the security model of Wayland.

And in the end: the people who decided this are the people actually willing to do the work to build and maintain the Linux desktop stack. If anyone knows what the right approach is, it’s them.

That seems like a shortcoming in those tools, that I’d expect them to fix as Flatpaks are pretty commonplace.

What makes you think that? The whole point of it is to create a rustc backend that uses libgccjit instead of LLVM.

It is supported by systemd to use FIDO2 + pin to decrypt luks partitions with many security keys, including Yubikeys. I use it every day on my laptop.

Seems like a solid bunch of iterative improvements!

What about ease of use, simplicity, faster to quickly setup, backwards compatibility,

The syntax of systemd timers is MUCH easier to read for newbies (and everyone else, really) as it uses words instead the placement of the characters on the line to convey meaning. If you can’t remember or don’t know the syntax well you can still understand a systemd timer, but that is much hard for the crontab. Granted, crontab uses fewer characters, but if you only set up either once in a blue moon you’ll need the docs to write either for a long time. And is backwards compatibility really an issue with either one? All major desktop and server distros use systemd, and has for a while. Fedora doesn’t even include a Cron by default anymore.

“crobtab is where everyone will look at when looking for a scheduled task”?

If it was a distro release from the last decade I’d definitely start by checking the systemd timers, rather than the crontab.

If systemd was implemented right, it would create the systemd files and autoconfigure default tasks by reading the crontab, for backwards compatibility.

You can to totally do this, using this systemd generator.