From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Noam Postavsky Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#28458: 26.0.50; Does Emacs support SAN (subject alternate names)? Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2017 21:33:55 -0500 Message-ID: <874lpdlsoc.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> References: <874ls58oc8.fsf@mouse.gnus.org> <877ewwdvir.fsf@gmail.com> <87ingggoei.fsf@mouse.gnus.org> <87377kduj9.fsf@gmail.com> <87zi9qgazl.fsf@mouse.gnus.org> <87r2v2ev32.fsf@gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1511922921 12938 195.159.176.226 (29 Nov 2017 02:35:21 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2017 02:35:21 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.0.90 (gnu/linux) Cc: Lars Ingebrigtsen , 28458@debbugs.gnu.org To: Robert Pluim Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Nov 29 03:35:16 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1eJsDR-0002kg-QJ for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 29 Nov 2017 03:35:13 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:41015 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eJsDW-0002IP-5m for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 28 Nov 2017 21:35:18 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:58954) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eJsDK-0002Dp-MY for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 28 Nov 2017 21:35:10 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eJsDG-0001uf-Q4 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 28 Nov 2017 21:35:06 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:55041) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eJsDG-0001uS-M9 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 28 Nov 2017 21:35:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1eJsDG-0001qW-GR for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 28 Nov 2017 21:35:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Noam Postavsky Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2017 02:35:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 28458 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: security Original-Received: via spool by 28458-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B28458.15119228607041 (code B ref 28458); Wed, 29 Nov 2017 02:35:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 28458) by debbugs.gnu.org; 29 Nov 2017 02:34:20 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:35489 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1eJsCU-0001pJ-GO for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 28 Nov 2017 21:34:18 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-it0-f43.google.com ([209.85.214.43]:43755) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1eJsCJ-0001oa-9n; Tue, 28 Nov 2017 21:34:08 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-it0-f43.google.com with SMTP id u62so2277675ita.2; Tue, 28 Nov 2017 18:34:03 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version; bh=OyubPU4Ae20JrPPJBcAdqmYaYrHtsQHAqWh4rlRvlI4=; b=owG3g6yl0diD00Py+ZTo+u0Vg+eTp+jkXRqlpMgc8erw7qiDmpIipEmcb9l7JFHLLh MWptX5oZjQvoQvnjRdZ3jwMBD0b25qjlspT9ORznnmPB/5FVbUeWjjc8Xf4exsedRLNe DJF7A2j7Lz6Rmw94KW0sVLopKtipFqH5Vcg+g6GhV3Yn2P+hChY0w2N6ZvBYt7jvM7WE gZMbYwIb/kFXuO11BpRkWF2eDdsWKDHi444Q8RF2TMQHY8lOKkFi+g6Ya6EXJ4bXi+GE JZXWRLVrBiiiZzf1Nvc78xYzLA5Orh1K5awZPeQxW/OC+TlzZcq4VGBCh9o4cQZGkpTt i2jw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date :in-reply-to:message-id:user-agent:mime-version; bh=OyubPU4Ae20JrPPJBcAdqmYaYrHtsQHAqWh4rlRvlI4=; b=My1qM7jlutE/4HUujIDvb1LluEAneWo9ZaDxoc3H/Qop5czbSYc0Vy1JT+GYWo+duQ QVElEmTEHiIsmMHs4iNnTLhf4RIeJKgd/mSZF2dG3kzgPd7hOgOFkw5cAYrM/Ryu0fOE uL0CQP5iegcmNhI2lmj7TDt1bT6dtLcBr94PtBLtkrecTOEz7Qz+9DEvIX10Yo5oO6tc kmfsdvZjaBVKL5/PDniiBlYdeNwEZ5U9E7ScPjBp4svGvbT9YoVdd9HvL37v1kPKVGM6 CmHkb68aTJrDJGnsxxHJec2JdSKum4ZFKAJU+dlkbJw98xxHaBGIHOT4dndFD5Hi5I9I /EZQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AJaThX6Z9uddmEO6UwS0pjvEFdQyx0RMgVXcPHdhe4wTDg8WZN+dUCtb 4tImvK9OYkK0MUvttBwKfyD7DMOK X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMa/F7sCrM7cJlCyBVhUA+yfbCZyQX5u1EpZYxWPDUsGDSVXOwuUQwBuU+AwzCXo3d7B4cnBKg== X-Received: by 10.36.25.20 with SMTP id b20mr5676141itb.31.1511922837651; Tue, 28 Nov 2017 18:33:57 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from zebian ([45.2.119.34]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id i76sm508492itf.3.2017.11.28.18.33.56 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Tue, 28 Nov 2017 18:33:56 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <87r2v2ev32.fsf@gmail.com> (Robert Pluim's message of "Tue, 19 Sep 2017 14:22:57 +0200") X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 208.118.235.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:140530 Archived-At: # not an Emacs bug tags 28458 notabug close 28458 quit Robert Pluim writes: > Lars Ingebrigtsen writes: > >> Finally, I got one of these warnings on a web site: >> >> `M-x eww RET >> http://media.boingboing.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Autonomous_Design20by20Will20Staehle.jpg RET' >> >> But! It looks like this is a genuine error: Firefox gives the same >> warning... So perhaps this isn't an issue after all? > > Also: that http URL redirects to https. If you access the https > version directly, it uses a different certificate than the redirected > one. Neither eww nor chrome complain about the non-redirected one. Seems to be fixed on the remote end now.