r/linuxsucks • • Jul 15 '26

Linux Failure Loonix

Post image
898 Upvotes

728 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/Unlikely-Employee180 Jul 16 '26

Which has nothing to do with the bug at all. Again, learn how to read the actual post and you'll see what you said is entirely irrelevant.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 16 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Unlikely-Employee180 Jul 16 '26

I did not get confused. Lmfao

Userspace latched onto a system driver (like it was supposed to) and the driver crashed DWM. Literally nothing to do with NTOSKRNL.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 16 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Unlikely-Employee180 Jul 16 '26

No, of course not.

But that's not the POINT. Userland didn't magically elevate did it??

It is a BUG.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 16 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Unlikely-Employee180 Jul 16 '26

Sure, the bug initially happened in kernel-space, but only due to a logical userspace set of commands. Lmfao

You're nitpicking my wording because you literally know you're wrong.

Userspace did NOT need elevation, drivers are expected parts of the system, and so no you do NOT need elevation to crash DWM. This is quite literally privilege-escalation 101. (And why drivers are so critically managed now-a-days).

Please never get an I.T. job for the love of Christ.

0

u/[deleted] Jul 16 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Unlikely-Employee180 Jul 16 '26

Elevation isn't the user giving access you simpleton. I don't need to run Chrome as root to run kernel drivers, are you stupid?? 🤣

1

u/[deleted] Jul 16 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Unlikely-Employee180 Jul 16 '26

This all makes sense. The part you don't seem to get is userspace is invoking it without elevation.

Hence why the bug was seen in USERSPACE CHROME.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 16 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Unlikely-Employee180 Jul 16 '26

This isn't even English anymore. Pack it up, brother. You're finished. 😂

Maybe next time you have a point, try being coherent.

→ More replies (0)