>Among the vulnerabilities are an unchecked malloc in client authentication leading to a potential denial of service, integer overflows, and out of bounds access due to not checking lengths/offsets in requests.
So judging from this paragraph we can see that the main reason for these vulnerabilities is not a question of bad design but because C, which is a very error prone language, was used.
C is cool for your little project, but we are humans and we make mistakes so for fuck's sake start using a language that actually helps you avoiding them.
Trully yours, Anon.
You guys should know that X is a steaming pile of shit and it is the only reason linux still can't compete with windows on the desktop.
It has nothing to do with C.
You know what was written in C?
Wayland is the future.
>checking lengths/offsets in requests
>not a question of bad design
Please, get back to your classes schlomo.
>Please, get back to your classes schlomo.
>blames C and not X for being a steaming pile of legacy shit
C makes creating these kind of errors so fucking easy. It's simply stupid to use it anymore in the name of
>muh developer should know better than writing bad code because real developers don't it
Enjoy your vulnerable software faggets
Somebody has to write C guys, not everyone can use python and C++ for everything.
Believe it or not, somewhere in the world, where all the real work gets done, memory actually matters.
>C makes creating these kind of errors so fucking easy. It's simply stupid to use it anymore
X was written like 30 years ago and many of these bugs are from 20+ years ago. This was a time before remote exploits in software was a thing that people seriously took into consideration.
The issue here is that that 20 year old code hasn't been audited thoroughly since then. X's huge disgusting codebase is probably making auditing very difficult.
nigger you think someone's going to write a fucking displayserver in java? you think someone's going to write a kernel in python?
get your head checked bitch cause your shit aint straight
That's the difference between MULTICS and Unix.
MULTICS was designed to be secure from the ground up.
Unix made security an afterthought and was rediscovered as a "secure" OS because compared to MS-DOS, Win 3.x, and classic MacOS, it was.
Yes you can you uneducated peasant. Lisp machines working is the proof of that.
You can write a kernel in fucking python, in fucking lua, in fucking brainfuck, in whaterver the fuck you can think of. If it's appropriate to do so is debatable.
Do you honestly think it's impossible to interact with the hardware with any language other than C?
>So judging from this paragraph we can see that the main reason for these vulnerabilities is not a question of bad design but because C, which is a very error prone language, was used.
Doesn't matter, xorg is still fucking shit and needs to die already.
So let me see if I got this down.
Wayland, a way for graphics using application to communicate with the kernel/hardware, makes X redundant, and once I run a window manager that is a wayland compositor, I can ditch X, because wayland includes xwayland?
How right and how fucked was that?
Pretty much spot on. It's worth noting that you'll almost invariably be still running apps that aren't Wayland-native, and thus will require Xwayland, which means you're not "fully" ditching X. X won't become redundant anytime soon.
>Cfags don't understand that operating systems also need assembly language in order to actually work.
>The probably think some operating systems are written entirely in C.
>They also think you can't do everything asides from that small amount of assembly in Lisp, as has already been done.