Others have written about how windows does it, but here’s some more details.

A window which runs with higher privileges (even just elevated to admin but still with your same account) cannot be read by normal privileges. You can see this when you use a custom screenshot program with some privileged system utility, but it’s key combo does not work when the higher privileged window is active (in the foreground, selected). The screenshot program could not access UI elements in the privileged window, and can’t send messages to it, but it can still see it rendered and capture it.

There’s also a feature called “secure desktop”. This is a bit like opening a new desktop with it’s separate “window namespace”. It’s distinct so much that it doesn’t have the taskbar and start menu, and by default it would be blackness, but you don’t notice it because the system takes a screenshot before opening it and sets that as background.
Admin utils rarely use this feature, as I know this is only used for the User Account Control window that appears when a program is asking for elevated permissions. This is where you type your password, or just accept or deny the elevation request.
The Keepass password manager can also make use of this feature for the unlock prompt, but it can’t use it that effectively, because the new secure desktop can be found in some way by other programs if it was not created with elevated privileges. It writes about this in it’s documentation.
Even though Linux nowadays has a password prompt dialog, it does not have anything similar to this secure desktop thing as I know.

Other than that, on windows (maybe linux too?) processes of the same user and privilege level can read each other’s memory. Without elevation. It’s quite complicated but it’s always there.
And like with gdb and strace on linux, there are ways on windows too to analyze or modify at runtime how a process works.

What controller? That does not seem to be a problem with the portal concept, but a pretty weird bug in the implementation of some part of it.

I don’t understand your point. If they don’t have enough access to install a keylogger, then they can’t grant permission to themselves. That’s why you want to keep them from being able to do that.

Just a similar tech. Few years ago they transitioned to something else for peer to peer load balancing.

What happened?

that tried tries to break E2EE.

Not this option, but generally I agree. Currently I don’t think this is bad, and in the longer term we will see if this leaks any identifyable data.

At that point why not just mock google’s various data mining services’ APIs?

I think making it an opt-out is sensible

The GDPR does not think so, does it?

it’s as simple as changing your useragent and

Good luck getting the average user to bother with that. But oh wait, the average user would not turn off javascript either, because dealing with that all day is very bothersome. How do I know? Been driving umatrix in whitelisting mode for years. I’ve got used to it, but every time someone sees that I need to reload sites multiple times to unbreak them they are visibly and audibly disgusted. What’s even worse is that they connect this with the fact that I use firefox, even after I tell them this is a fucking addon, and they think Firefox is like that by default.

Ok, but… hmm. Do you have statistics on the share between desktop and mobile users? Maybe I’m wrong, but I think most browse lemmy from a phone. Most torrents work fine because most torrenters do that on a PC, but relatively very few on a phone. I’m honestly interested if you have some info on that.

In any case, I hope it works out because I would love if it would. Thanks for your work!

Not sure about that. I’m not watching repair videos out of boredom, but only when I need to get something fixed.

I was responding to this:

Taler also individuals to stay private while preventing crime. I personally could never use crypto as it empowers criminals and is very unpredictable.

The best protection may be to avoid sites that make use of it, at least to the extent possible

Microsoft says they violated its terms of service - but will not say how - and the decision is final.

Classic Microsoft move. Do you remember what happened to kids and people being forced to register a Microsoft account to not lose their paid license to Minecraft, but who didn’t want to hand out their phone numbers? Yeah. They have somehow “violated the terms of service”, even if they did nothing with their account after registration, other than the license being transferred!

Besides that, you won’t be able to get your drivers signed for windows to accept them, so it’s basically futile anyway

Except it’s not only entertainment. There’s tons of the useful kind of content too, including repair videos.

That’s an interesting concept. Thought how will it work for mobile users? Uploading there is often costly, both in the limited data plan and battery life.

Can’t we basically call this a remote access trojan?

You may also try to run qb in a container that somehow has a basic graphical environment, and waypipe it to your desktop pc.

Never done that, but having been wanted to try it out.