tiny-snitch VS wayland-keylogger

i use a kind of tui. it is actually a gui, pops up fullscreen. you can’t click it though, just keypress interaction.

i agree with you. especially if i’m filtering all traffic, i need to be able to y/n quickly and easily.

https://github.com/nathants/tinysnitch#demo

the libnetfilterqueue setup i use locally is here: https://github.com/nathants/tinysnitch

> There isn't even a single decent dynamic firewall with those annoying popups.

even benign apps that phone home like pulumi and terraform are fun to see and block with annoying popups.

monitoring egress really is the only realistic play. i rolled my own[1], inspired by opensnitch[2].

netfilter_queue is really great, and definitely makes annoying popup dynamic firewalls possible.

1. https://github.com/nathants/tinysnitch

Intercepting inputs meant for other apps is easy and it's already been done via LD_PRELOAD.

And all of this just for supposedly better "security", that can easily circumvented with trivial attacks.

Not in the same sense that there's a keylogger included with Windows, no. It's that it's easier to do on Xorg as opposed to Wayland. This isn't to say that it's impossible, however.

You can have keylogger on Wayland also without root priviledge. It's trivial: https://github.com/Aishou/wayland-keylogger

> you can still deliver different experiences at runtime — but you’re not likely to have the superuser privileges needed to run a leylogger or read ~/.ssh/id_rsa, etc, at that point.

Keyloggers are trivial to do in userspace Linux via LD_PRELOAD attacks[0], and typically your user account has permission to read ~/.ssh/id_rsa.

[0] https://github.com/Aishou/wayland-keylogger

I have read that bare Linux is totally insecure (https://github.com/Aishou/wayland-keylogger) unless you use some means of sandboxing. That's why I have been reading a lot about firejail, AppArmor, Tomoyo, etc.