Post B19i3gRb2MjsCeiTGC by lanodan@queer.hacktivis.me
(DIR) More posts by lanodan@queer.hacktivis.me
(DIR) Post #B19Go7qShBEHn3hh9k by lanodan@queer.hacktivis.me
2025-12-11T19:25:45.736241Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ariadne Also… do they not know about xmessage?But well of course it's all just yuck yuck yuck anyway.
(DIR) Post #B19J67PbFEvPZEqYaW by erikarn@mstdn.social
2025-12-11T19:18:31Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Dio9sys @ariadne (cry can't we have a managed x11 fork that keeps the gay furries involved? pretty please? Ill create it if we need it)
(DIR) Post #B19J68z5OmuARaSPXU by feld@friedcheese.us
2025-12-11T19:27:24.721247Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@erikarn @Dio9sys @ariadne I mean come on guys, it might be silly but what is the danger? they're calling whichIf you have a compromised version of which on your computer or in root's PATH you're already boned. So this is a bit of an overreaction. We don't need to dork dunk on people all the time.
(DIR) Post #B19JEoqVdriMama9rc by feld@friedcheese.us
2025-12-11T19:32:40.350431Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ariadne @developing_agent wouldn't it just be more efficient to send them a comment on the pull request instead of posting on the Fediverse where they'll never see it thoughedit: and who can control the X server's PATH except root?
(DIR) Post #B19JEpQfTQdcOvV2Dw by phnt@fluffytail.org
2025-12-11T19:53:04.524985Z
1 likes, 1 repeats
@feld @developing_agent @ariadne Somehow, through some weird observation I cannot understand, I don't think that helping the PR author, or even notifying the PR author about that possibility was ever the intention of this thread.No idea how I came to that conclusion though.
(DIR) Post #B19ZHFxNPkWuWKyivY by feld@friedcheese.us
2025-12-11T22:49:04.918693Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@i @phnt whoa whoa whoa did we just let facts into this thread? that seems dangerous
(DIR) Post #B19dpDZlAl8YnaNiE4 by gorplop@pleroma.m68k.church
2025-12-11T23:07:10.660112Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ariadne ok, so what? it's a fixed command string, no parameters are passed which could be escaped, if your `which` is compromised you are done for either way. I see nothing wrong with it.
(DIR) Post #B19dpEpkUnWMhSrzmq by gorplop@pleroma.m68k.church
2025-12-11T23:08:15.134969Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ariadne also i agree with inorton's comment
(DIR) Post #B19dpFuOV0pa2A3DfM by wolf480pl@mstdn.io
2025-12-11T23:43:39Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@gorplop @ariadne scroll down to https://github.com/X11Libre/xserver/pull/1627/files#diff-17ab6dac138c48f85820915df25942b72baf1acb51d289e2d2eacc6ed8f359b8R2307
(DIR) Post #B19hf7RbVwnyhe0TKK by lanodan@queer.hacktivis.me
2025-12-12T00:26:32.630914Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ariadne In fact I've yet to find a system where you're not stuck with hard-rebooting in case of the shell fork-bomb.Softer ones where it just spawns processes in a loop but stays open being much easier to deal with.
(DIR) Post #B19i3gRb2MjsCeiTGC by lanodan@queer.hacktivis.me
2025-12-12T00:31:01.569112Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ariadne Better go real fast on this one, at least I remember that trying to make killall do this was a lesson in futility because by the time it would have done it's loop over proc, others processes would have spawned.
(DIR) Post #B19jTwn4z3I2NsqtRw by ity@estradiol.city
2025-12-12T00:39:19Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@lanodan @ariadne I am half tempted to try on mine cuz I am pretty sure I will just hit the process ulimit and it will terminate gracefully when I close the parent process of all of them (the term em)
(DIR) Post #B19jTy6y4anETrAI5Y by lanodan@queer.hacktivis.me
2025-12-12T00:46:24.900688Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ity @ariadne Closing the parent process won't have an effect, specially as it's backgrounded.(Otherwise you'd have to use nohup, which doesn't looks as cryptic)
(DIR) Post #B19mwHLwQWfo7zMMcq by ity@estradiol.city
2025-12-12T00:56:31Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@lanodan @ariadne If I remember right, & does not reparent it to pid1, but rather to the session leader, which should get killed when the terminal emulator diesBut I should actually check, true. I will probably test in a VM. I have played around with it in a cgroup but yk.
(DIR) Post #B19mwIUqAvNzfsWz8S by lanodan@queer.hacktivis.me
2025-12-12T01:25:39.725709Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ity @ariadne Yeah, & keeps it to the session leader, but you'd need a session leader which sends a SIGTERM/SIGKILL to it's process group before exiting, and I don't think any terminal emulator does that.At least sending the kill to a process group would be more effective against a forkbomb than killall(1), but also more damaging. (But of course better than ultimately hard-rebooting)
(DIR) Post #B1GupeYHvxvjn8CpIO by aismallard@woem.space
2025-12-11T22:38:18.631071Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@erikarn @Dio9sys @ariadne why do we need an X11 fork. wayland is the thing actually being maintained, the X11 chud fork literally only exists due to opportunism
(DIR) Post #B1GupgDRkQRmx4TD5U by leo@60228.dev
2025-12-12T02:27:37Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@aismallard i am increasingly feeling that sticking to x11 is fash-coded
(DIR) Post #B1GuphJ9ggbkL49Hcm by mpg@dsmc.space
2025-12-15T11:57:14.184102Z
2 likes, 1 repeats
@leo @aismallard I sure do feel like voting for Mussolini because I need a working VNC remote desktop.
(DIR) Post #B1GvCatNhtjL6L0kb2 by mpg@dsmc.space
2025-12-15T12:01:27.276047Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@ariadne Xir, if you wanted to make fun of a fork with cooties, you could've picked on the VRAM leak (1) (2) with modesetting drivers instead of a pull request that raised the same considerations from maintainers.