From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24855 invoked by alias); 26 Feb 2019 06:52:28 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Received: (qmail 24841 invoked by uid 89); 26 Feb 2019 06:52:28 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-6.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,GIT_PATCH_2 autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=handheld, sessions, Yeah, thinks X-HELO: Ishtar.sc.tlinx.org Received: from ishtar.tlinx.org (HELO Ishtar.sc.tlinx.org) (173.164.175.65) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Tue, 26 Feb 2019 06:52:26 +0000 Received: from [192.168.3.12] (Athenae [192.168.3.12]) by Ishtar.sc.tlinx.org (8.14.7/8.14.4/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id x1Q6qLXt005173; Mon, 25 Feb 2019 22:52:24 -0800 Message-ID: <5C74E202.3010306@tlinx.org> Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2019 08:41:00 -0000 From: L A Walsh User-Agent: Thunderbird MIME-Version: 1.0 To: =?UTF-8?B?UmVuw6kgQmVyYmVy?= , mikebrady@eircom.net CC: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: Question about D-Bus and cygrunsrv References: <287EA5C9-AEDB-417D-8E1D-29405AB24325@eircom.net> <23766B16-3812-4D94-AA7C-C61C167A05C9@eircom.net> <20190222095525.GN4256@calimero.vinschen.de> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2019-02/txt/msg00429.txt.bz2 On 2/22/2019 2:16 PM, René Berber wrote: > > > My guess is that its a permission problem: D-Bus by default on Windows > uses unix sockets (fills up your temp directory with those pesky files : > - -) > > In Cygwin the temp directory has the sticky permission (t), but the > socket file created by the server most likely doesn't have access for > anybody else. > --- I'm not sure, but I'd think dbus demon would be enabled to talk to the system socket > Check those permissions to maybe get a clue. > > The problem comes from upstream, I'm just not sure because I used to > build my own, patched, version of DBUS (for a workaround which is to > use tcp, not unix sockets... but the Windows maintainer says "nobody > uses tcp sockets on Windows", and then they "improved" security which > is why I suspect access permissions). > --- Yeah, they are more than a little bit security paranoid. I'd like to get the dbus sessions between my desktop & server to talk -- like when I am running an X-app, and press help, it really would be better if it brought up the browser on my desktop instead of one on the server via X. I had hopes as one of their examples specifies tcp in the protocol field, but supposedly the tcp doesn't work and likely won't due to security concerns -- mainly because the bus architecture was structured around the idea of an internal HW bus -- where normally there isn't much in the way of security. If they allowed it to be open to a network, then they think everyone on the internet will have access and that dbus will be blaimed for a security problem. I did mention that some people use closed nets between machines and should be allowed to use dbus to talk between them where desirable, but he thinks that most hand-held users wouldn't know how to isolate a net. On top of that, dbus doesn't have the ability to categorize if the net is public, private(home) or enterprise(work). Seemed like a pain to get working for what would be a plus for me, but not sure about demand, not to mention working with such paranoid folk really can be frustrating. There's a dbus list where they talk about development and security issues @ https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dbus best of luck! -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple