Comment by stonogo
And when someone violates that trust, do you then tear the house down and build one with only external doors, requiring inhabitants to circle in the yard to move between rooms? The point of the Wayland security model is that the inhabitants of the house do not trust each other, and the architecture of the house must change to accommodate that.
I'm not impressed with the analogy. I am not confused about the goals of Wayland's security model. I am dismayed at the poor judgment elsewhere in computing that has led to its necessity.
I could have done without the "any stranger can run foreign code on my machine" bit, personally. I'm OK with doing away with Javascript forever, along with the whole "my computer just randomly downloads binary code silently in the background at intervals of its choosing" (aka "critical updates") that then becomes seen as a necessity.
Nobody needed constant code updates streaming to their PC in the BBS days when it was just ANSI or RipScript over a TTY. With complicated HTML/XML parsers the game started changing. Then Javascript came along and opened the posterior doors wide open.