[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Strange X11 Assersion



It was FUD. Some silly people had a default policy on xwin that didn't have any host or authenication restrictions. Sorry to bother you all.

Philip Thiem

--On Monday, October 04, 2004 06:39:00 PM -0500 Philip Thiem <witwerg@icequake.net> wrote:

Recently a friend made the assertion that I want to get some feed back on:

"if you connect to an x server you have access to the protocol stream of
any other user also connected to it"

I couldn't get him to clarify at the time, but as a broad statement it
seems dubious (particularly the IT dept
he's working for has recent been taken over by a bunch of
Windows Kool-Aide Dispensers).  But I acknowledge I that do not know
everything, nor am I capable of speaking the X protocol fluently.  I
thought maybe he meant that unencrypted traffic could be sniffed, but
claimed that wasn't it.  I'm still trying to get more documentation on
this inherent flaw.  So.. does anyone have, clue what this could be
talking about and what the scope of it would be? Or is this just BS/FUD?

Or would it be a better idea to post to a X.org or XFree86 mailing list?


Philip Thiem -- Icequake.net Administrator
Isn't it obvious lumberjacks love traffic lights?
GPG Pub Key Archived at wwwkeys.us.pgp.net



Philip Thiem -- Icequake.net Administrator
Isn't it obvious lumberjacks love traffic lights?
GPG Pub Key Archived at wwwkeys.us.pgp.net

Attachment: pgpPxzXq9gS2F.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: