One JACK server for multiple users

rekado · 2011-05-23 11:03:16

It seems that support for JACK_PROMISCUOUS_SERVER has been removed, so JACK only allows programs to connect which were started by the same user who started the JACK server. Is there another way to tell JACK to accept connections from other users? Or do I have to start two servers (one for each user) communicating via the local network?

Why I'm asking:
My browser is running with the permissions of the user "browser" to prevent malicious code executed by the browser to seriously affect my files. This leads to the problem that audio playback in the browser is rendered mute, as it cannot connect to the JACK server that has been started by my main user account.

Any ideas on how to make this work?

rekado · 2011-05-26 10:05:46

Bumping this question with the addition of the observation that MPD + JACK seems to fail for the same reason, as MPD runs as its very own user. I should probably ask this question on the JACK mailing list.

ConnorBehan · 2011-05-27 00:53:14

If connections from multiple users really don't work anymore then this is bad news. Especially if someone wants to use Netjack... I mean the users can't be the same if the hosts aren't even the same!

schivmeister · 2011-05-31 12:59:50

I don't think this was ever "supported". I somehow assume that the hack still works (with JACK_PROMISCUOUS_SERVER) but I have yet to go back to it since the last discussion about it. According to Torben H. (read the last few messages of that topic) it should work.

NetJACK works in a different way and allows different clients to connect, AFAIK. It has been suggested that some form of this exact functionality can be used in lieu of the promiscuous trick for JACK itself.

Anyway, for MPD, you can try the alternative setup.

rekado · 2011-05-31 13:46:00

Thanks for the link to the discussion on the mailing list. It's very helpful. I actually thought about using NetJACK locally in some way to allow the browser to connect to JACK. After reading the dicussion, though, it seems to go against the original purpose of running the browser as a separate user. If the separate browser user can be persuaded to crash JACK via a malicious plugin, it could convince the JACK user to run malicious code. Maybe this exploit scenario is too contrived, but I have to think it through. JACK would have to run as a different user (not the main user), then.

Arch Linux

#1 2011-05-23 11:03:16

One JACK server for multiple users

#2 2011-05-26 10:05:46

Re: One JACK server for multiple users

#3 2011-05-27 00:53:14

Re: One JACK server for multiple users

#4 2011-05-31 12:59:50

Re: One JACK server for multiple users

#5 2011-05-31 13:46:00

Re: One JACK server for multiple users

Board footer