<html> <head> <base href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/"> </head> <body> <div> <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - Add an API for taking screenshots and recording screencasts" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=98894#c2">Comment # 2</a> on <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - Add an API for taking screenshots and recording screencasts" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=98894">bug 98894</a> from <a class="email" href="mailto:frdsktp@genodeftest.de" title="Christian Stadelmann <frdsktp@genodeftest.de>"> Christian Stadelmann</a> <pre>(In reply to Pekka Paalanen from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=98894#c1">comment #1</a>) > > * The wayland compositor should be able to decide (based on rules or user > > decisions) whether to allow or deny the request. For this, applications need > > to have a way to provide information about themselves (like application name > > and icon) and why they want to take a screenshot/screencast. > > This is the very problem. If an application provides identification info > itself, it can lie. This is actually the root problem for authenticating any > privileged actions, and I don't think there exists a commonly agreed > solution yet. Afaik, applications can't lie about /proc/[pid]/exe and the compositor could use .desktop files from /usr/share/applications for identification (with both name and icon). Also, there could be a flag e.g. in these .desktop files for allowing screenshots / screencasts.</pre> </div> <hr> You are receiving this mail because: <ul> <li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li> </ul> </body> </html>