similar to: [Bug 2552] New: ssh -X and "ForwardX11Trusted no" break most applications, distros turn on "ForwardX11Trusted yes"

On Sep 15, 2020, at 19:32, Jack Bailey via CentOS <centos at centos.org> wrote: > > This is not the answer to your question, but if this is a new install and not an existing installation, consider NoMachine <https://www.nomachine.com/>. It's free and so much better than x2go it's hard to even compare the two. It is ?free? only for noncommercial use. It isn?t open

http://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=987 Summary: "man ssh" doesn't mention 'ForwardX11Trusted' Product: Portable OpenSSH Version: 3.9p1 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P5 Component: Documentation AssignedTo: openssh-bugs at

Hi, although i'm using X11Forwarding only in my local environment, i'd like to avoid setting 'ForwardX11Trusted' to 'yes'. When starting applications like 'freerdp' on the remote machine while 'ForwardX11Trusted' is _not_ set to 'yes' on the client, the characters \ = 51 = <BKSL> backslash | = 94 = <LSGT> pipe won't work. Any

On 2005-01-11 at 6:36:13 Darren Tucker said: > kochera at postfinance.ch wrote: > > We upgraded from 3.7.1p2 to 3.9p1. The behaviour of the X11 forwarding > > changed significantly, it is much slower. See below the truss output > > (server side which runs 3.7.1p2) an check for the timestamp (6 seconds > > delay). Do you have any idea what may causes this behaviour?

Since packaging OpenSSH 3.8p1 for Debian, I've got a flood of bug reports and confusion about the new untrusted X client configuration. At least part of this seems to be the short (2 minutes!) timeout on the cookie, so that if you're impatient like me and open a connection to a machine that takes a little while to do the key exchange, go off and do something in another window in the

> On Sep 15, 2020, at 8:30 PM, Jonathan Billings <billings at negate.org> wrote: > > On Sep 15, 2020, at 19:32, Jack Bailey via CentOS <centos at centos.org> wrote: >> >> This is not the answer to your question, but if this is a new install and not an existing installation, consider NoMachine <https://www.nomachine.com/>. It's free and so much better

http://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=987 dtucker at zip.com.au changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |CLOSED ------- Comment #3 from dtucker at zip.com.au 2006-10-07 11:38 ------- Change all RESOLVED bug to CLOSED with the exception

On Mon, 6 Jul 2015, Liam O'Toole wrote: > On 2015-07-05, Gordon Messmer > <gordon.messmer at gmail.com> wrote: >> On 07/05/2015 04:51 AM, Liam O'Toole wrote: >> >> At this point, I don't think it's even possible to set >> ForwardX11Trusted=no any more. The X SECURITY extension was replaced >> with "X Access Control Extension"

http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15276 Summary: text rendering, PGRAPH_ERROR/ILLEGAL_MTHD/PROTECTION_FAULT spam in syslog Product: xorg Version: git Platform: x86 (IA32) OS/Version: Linux (All) Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: medium Component:

I have installed x2goserver on a Centos8 server. Yesterday, after the installation I was able to connect by means of x2go. Today I get the following error ( /var/log/messages) /usr/bin/x2gostartagent[2677]: no free display number available, cannot start new session. Has anyone had the same problem? Thanks. Bye Stefano

Versions: openssh-3.8p1-33, heimdal-0.6.1rc3-51, XFree86-4.3.99.902-40, tk-8.4.6-37, all from SuSE 9.1 (unhacked); back-version peers have openssh-3.5p1, XFree86-4.3.0-115, etc. from SuSE 8.2. Symptoms: 1. When the client and server versions are unequal, the Kerberos ticket is not accepted for authentication. All the clients have PreferredAuthentications gssapi-with-mic, gssapi, others. 2.

http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10927 Summary: segmentation fault in NVUploadToScreen, called from exaPutImage Product: xorg Version: git Platform: x86-64 (AMD64) OS/Version: Linux (All) Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: medium Component: Driver/nouveau

On 07/05/2015 04:51 AM, Liam O'Toole wrote: > One practical difference I have seen is the improved performance of -Y > over -X. I have long attributed that to the relaxation of security > controls in the former case. When and how did you measure that? The -Y change was introduced in Fedora Core 3, in November 2004. The default was changed to ForwardX11Trusted=yes just a month or

Has anybody else experienced weird X11 forwarding problems such as the one below: andreas at teste10:~> x3270 X Error of failed request: BadWindow (invalid Window parameter) Major opcode of failed request: 3 (X_GetWindowAttributes) Resource id in failed request: 0x404372 Serial number of failed request: 833 Current serial number in output stream: 834 or andreas at teste10:~>

On Mon, Feb 05, 2018 at 03:46:17PM +0100, Tomeu Vizoso wrote: > On 02/05/2018 01:20 PM, Gerd Hoffmann wrote: > > Hi, > > > > > > Why not use virtio-vsock to run the wayland protocol? I don't like > > > > the idea to duplicate something with very simliar functionality in > > > > virtio-gpu. > > > > > > The reason for

On Mon, Feb 05, 2018 at 03:46:17PM +0100, Tomeu Vizoso wrote: > On 02/05/2018 01:20 PM, Gerd Hoffmann wrote: > > Hi, > > > > > > Why not use virtio-vsock to run the wayland protocol? I don't like > > > > the idea to duplicate something with very simliar functionality in > > > > virtio-gpu. > > > > > > The reason for

Hi, > > Hmm? I'm assuming the wayland client (in the guest) talks to the > > wayland proxy, using the wayland protocol, like it would talk to a > > wayland display server. Buffers must be passed from client to > > server/proxy somehow, probably using fd passing, so where is the > > problem? > > > > Or did I misunderstand the role of the proxy? >

Hi, > > Hmm? I'm assuming the wayland client (in the guest) talks to the > > wayland proxy, using the wayland protocol, like it would talk to a > > wayland display server. Buffers must be passed from client to > > server/proxy somehow, probably using fd passing, so where is the > > problem? > > > > Or did I misunderstand the role of the proxy? >

> On 30/10/2023, at 8:38 AM, Dirk Eddelbuettel <edd at debian.org> wrote: > > > On 30 October 2023 at 07:54, Paul Murrell wrote: > | I am unaware of any Wayland display support. > | > | One useful way forward would be an R package that provides such a device > | (along the lines of 'Cairo', 'tikzDevice', et al) > > As I understand it, it is

On 30 October 2023 at 07:54, Paul Murrell wrote: | I am unaware of any Wayland display support. | | One useful way forward would be an R package that provides such a device | (along the lines of 'Cairo', 'tikzDevice', et al) As I understand it, it is a protocol, and not a device. Several Linux distributions have long defaulted to it, so we already should have thousands of