* bug#39185: [PATCH] Don't include section "Recent messages" in bug reports
@ 2020-01-18 23:58 Stefan Kangas
2020-01-19 2:21 ` Drew Adams
0 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: Stefan Kangas @ 2020-01-18 23:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 39185
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 185 bytes --]
Does anyone object to installing the below patch on master?
See here for background:
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2019-11/msg01099.html
Best regards,
Stefan Kangas
[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #2: 0001-Don-t-include-section-Recent-messages-in-bug-reports.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-diff, Size: 1436 bytes --]
From 74d5b879b42a7f3084910eda74b2b733ebe8984a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Stefan Kangas <stefankangas@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2019 10:30:30 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] Don't include section "Recent messages" in bug reports
* lisp/mail/emacsbug.el (report-emacs-bug): Don't include "Recent
messages" since it has privacy implications.
Problem reported by Lars Ingebrigtsen in:
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2019-11/msg01099.html
---
lisp/mail/emacsbug.el | 12 ------------
1 file changed, 12 deletions(-)
diff --git a/lisp/mail/emacsbug.el b/lisp/mail/emacsbug.el
index fea7619b50..e4534746dd 100644
--- a/lisp/mail/emacsbug.el
+++ b/lisp/mail/emacsbug.el
@@ -320,18 +320,6 @@ report-emacs-bug
(let ((os (ignore-errors (report-emacs-bug--os-description))))
(if (stringp os)
(insert "System Description: " os "\n\n")))
- (let ((message-buf (get-buffer "*Messages*")))
- (if message-buf
- (let (beg-pos
- (end-pos message-end-point))
- (with-current-buffer message-buf
- (goto-char end-pos)
- (forward-line -10)
- (setq beg-pos (point)))
- (terpri (current-buffer) t)
- (insert "Recent messages:\n")
- (insert-buffer-substring message-buf beg-pos end-pos))))
- (insert "\n")
(when (and system-configuration-options
(not (equal system-configuration-options "")))
(insert "Configured using:\n 'configure "
--
2.20.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* bug#39185: [PATCH] Don't include section "Recent messages" in bug reports
2020-01-18 23:58 bug#39185: [PATCH] Don't include section "Recent messages" in bug reports Stefan Kangas
@ 2020-01-19 2:21 ` Drew Adams
2020-01-19 2:39 ` Stefan Kangas
0 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: Drew Adams @ 2020-01-19 2:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stefan Kangas, 39185
> Does anyone object to installing the below patch on master?
I do. What if a user wants to include that info in a
particular bug report, e.g., where it's relevant?
Why not make it easy for a user to include it, even
if by default it's excluded?
As I made clear in the thread you cite:
It's not just about "Recent messages". It's about
anything we automatically insert into the report,
which a user might not pay attention to, or even if
she does, which she might not want to send.
Let users decide. A simple option takes care of
this. And separating the parts of the code that
insert each different part of the automatic info
means that we can also give users commands to
insert any of them as one-offs, to override their
chosen default preferred behavior.
I see no reason why we wouldn't want to let users
decide, in this regard - whether it's about privacy
or any other reason a user might have for her
preference.
What's the difficulty or downside to doing this?
I agree with not including recent messages by
default. My suggestion is to make it easy for a
user to:
1. Include/exclude any of the various parts that
we currently exclude, by setting their own
preferred default behavior.
2. Make it easy for a user to include/exclude any
such parts for any given bug report, i.e., to
include/exclude something different from what
they choose as their default preference.
Anything you do in a hard-coded way makes it more
difficult for users. It's good for Emacs to remove
recent messages _by default_. It's better to go
further and make it easy for users to get the
behavior they want - generally and for any given
message.
And it's simple to do. And it makes the Emacs code
more modular - separate pieces handled separately.
I don't see a downside, and AFAICT none was shown.
I don't claim that the code I use for this, or
what I suggest as the approach, is the only good
one. I do think we can easily, and should, do
better than just remove recent messages.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* bug#39185: [PATCH] Don't include section "Recent messages" in bug reports
2020-01-19 2:21 ` Drew Adams
@ 2020-01-19 2:39 ` Stefan Kangas
2020-01-19 15:13 ` Eli Zaretskii
2020-01-19 19:24 ` Drew Adams
0 siblings, 2 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Stefan Kangas @ 2020-01-19 2:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Drew Adams; +Cc: 39185
Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com> writes:
>> Does anyone object to installing the below patch on master?
>
> I do. What if a user wants to include that info in a
> particular bug report, e.g., where it's relevant?
> Why not make it easy for a user to include it, even
> if by default it's excluded?
I don't think that feature request should stop us from moving ahead
with this potentially serious privacy issue.
If someone later wants to re-add an option to include messages, and
configure the bug reports along the lines you suggest, they are free
to work on that.
Best regards,
Stefan Kangas
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* bug#39185: [PATCH] Don't include section "Recent messages" in bug reports
2020-01-19 2:39 ` Stefan Kangas
@ 2020-01-19 15:13 ` Eli Zaretskii
2020-01-19 15:27 ` Stefan Kangas
2020-01-19 19:24 ` Drew Adams
1 sibling, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2020-01-19 15:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stefan Kangas; +Cc: 39185
> From: Stefan Kangas <stefan@marxist.se>
> Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2020 03:39:41 +0100
> Cc: 39185@debbugs.gnu.org
>
> I don't think that feature request should stop us from moving ahead
> with this potentially serious privacy issue.
<rant>
The right way of dealing with these issues is to hide the parts which
could breach the privacy by converting the characters there into
something like "xxx" or "***", and leave the rest of the information
intact. Instead, we consistently take the easy way out by removing
everything, and thus make the Emacs bug reports less and less useful
for investigating the problems. Too bad.
</rant>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* bug#39185: [PATCH] Don't include section "Recent messages" in bug reports
2020-01-19 15:13 ` Eli Zaretskii
@ 2020-01-19 15:27 ` Stefan Kangas
2020-01-19 15:49 ` Eli Zaretskii
0 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: Stefan Kangas @ 2020-01-19 15:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Eli Zaretskii; +Cc: 39185
Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
> The right way of dealing with these issues is to hide the parts which
> could breach the privacy by converting the characters there into
> something like "xxx" or "***", and leave the rest of the information
> intact.
How would you propose to do that in the general case?
Best regards,
Stefan Kangas
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* bug#39185: [PATCH] Don't include section "Recent messages" in bug reports
2020-01-19 15:27 ` Stefan Kangas
@ 2020-01-19 15:49 ` Eli Zaretskii
2020-01-19 16:07 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
2020-08-18 16:11 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
0 siblings, 2 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2020-01-19 15:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stefan Kangas; +Cc: 39185
> From: Stefan Kangas <stefan@marxist.se>
> Cc: 39185@debbugs.gnu.org, drew.adams@oracle.com
> Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2020 16:27:45 +0100
>
> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
>
> > The right way of dealing with these issues is to hide the parts which
> > could breach the privacy by converting the characters there into
> > something like "xxx" or "***", and leave the rest of the information
> > intact.
>
> How would you propose to do that in the general case?
I'm not sure I understand what is the general case here. Each part of
the report that could potentially disclose private information shall
be identified and dealt with.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* bug#39185: [PATCH] Don't include section "Recent messages" in bug reports
2020-01-19 15:49 ` Eli Zaretskii
@ 2020-01-19 16:07 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
2020-01-19 16:43 ` Eli Zaretskii
2020-08-18 16:11 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
1 sibling, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: Lars Ingebrigtsen @ 2020-01-19 16:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Eli Zaretskii; +Cc: 39185, Stefan Kangas
Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
> I'm not sure I understand what is the general case here. Each part of
> the report that could potentially disclose private information shall
> be identified and dealt with.
There's little in the *Messages* buffer that isn't potentially private.
For instance, here's the last two lines of mine:
nnimap quimby.gnus.org splitting mail...done
nnimap read 6k from quimby.gnus.org
That could be private information. It rather sounds like you're asking
us to get rid of the *Messages* buffer altogether.
--
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* bug#39185: [PATCH] Don't include section "Recent messages" in bug reports
2020-01-19 16:07 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
@ 2020-01-19 16:43 ` Eli Zaretskii
2020-01-19 16:47 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
2020-01-20 12:33 ` Dmitry Gutov
0 siblings, 2 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2020-01-19 16:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Lars Ingebrigtsen; +Cc: 39185, stefan
> From: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org>
> Cc: Stefan Kangas <stefan@marxist.se>, 39185@debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2020 17:07:09 +0100
>
> nnimap quimby.gnus.org splitting mail...done
> nnimap read 6k from quimby.gnus.org
>
> That could be private information.
Is it? Then perhaps the name of the system on which Emacs was built,
and the configuration used to build it are also private?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* bug#39185: [PATCH] Don't include section "Recent messages" in bug reports
2020-01-19 16:43 ` Eli Zaretskii
@ 2020-01-19 16:47 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
2020-01-19 17:10 ` Stefan Kangas
2020-01-20 12:33 ` Dmitry Gutov
1 sibling, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: Lars Ingebrigtsen @ 2020-01-19 16:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Eli Zaretskii; +Cc: 39185, stefan
Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
> Is it? Then perhaps the name of the system on which Emacs was built,
> and the configuration used to build it are also private?
It's possible, but it sounds unlikely. That it's private which servers
you're talking to is pretty likely, though.
And we've already established that we, as bug processors, have no use
for the data (you thought is was already gone?), it seems odd to spend a
lot of time making the *Messages* buffer less useful.
--
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* bug#39185: [PATCH] Don't include section "Recent messages" in bug reports
2020-01-19 16:47 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
@ 2020-01-19 17:10 ` Stefan Kangas
2020-01-19 19:20 ` Drew Adams
0 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: Stefan Kangas @ 2020-01-19 17:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Lars Ingebrigtsen; +Cc: 39185
Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes:
>> Is it? Then perhaps the name of the system on which Emacs was built,
>> and the configuration used to build it are also private?
>
> It's possible, but it sounds unlikely. That it's private which servers
> you're talking to is pretty likely, though.
In the messages buffer, file names, buffer names and email addresses
are some of the concerning examples of private data I've seen. We
also have to consider that we have no control over what kind of
information third party or user code puts there.
Best regards,
Stefan Kangas
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* bug#39185: [PATCH] Don't include section "Recent messages" in bug reports
2020-01-19 17:10 ` Stefan Kangas
@ 2020-01-19 19:20 ` Drew Adams
0 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Drew Adams @ 2020-01-19 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stefan Kangas, Lars Ingebrigtsen; +Cc: 39185
> >> Is it? Then perhaps the name of the system on which Emacs was
> built,
> >> and the configuration used to build it are also private?
> >
> > It's possible, but it sounds unlikely. That it's private which
> servers
> > you're talking to is pretty likely, though.
>
> In the messages buffer, file names, buffer names and email addresses
> are some of the concerning examples of private data I've seen. We
> also have to consider that we have no control over what kind of
> information third party or user code puts there.
Yes.
And as I said, the wrong approach, I think, is for
Emacs dev to make a once-and-for-all, fits-all-sizes
judgment as to what is or could be sensitive.
Instead, we should give users themselves a simple
way to express their own preferences. Let them
(easily) decide what is or could be sensitive. Let
them decide what information they want to send.
And let them do that easily, (1) by configuring the
reporting profile they want by default, and (2) by
giving them commands/keys to add or remove particular
parts.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* bug#39185: [PATCH] Don't include section "Recent messages" in bug reports
2020-01-19 16:43 ` Eli Zaretskii
2020-01-19 16:47 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
@ 2020-01-20 12:33 ` Dmitry Gutov
1 sibling, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Dmitry Gutov @ 2020-01-20 12:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Eli Zaretskii, Lars Ingebrigtsen; +Cc: 39185, stefan
On 19.01.2020 19:43, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> Is it? Then perhaps the name of the system on which Emacs was built,
> and the configuration used to build it are also private?
If the default contents of the bug report email are short enough, it
should be easy for the user to scan and decide whether they want to
remove some extra info manually.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* bug#39185: [PATCH] Don't include section "Recent messages" in bug reports
2020-01-19 15:49 ` Eli Zaretskii
2020-01-19 16:07 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
@ 2020-08-18 16:11 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
2020-08-18 16:31 ` Eli Zaretskii
1 sibling, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: Lars Ingebrigtsen @ 2020-08-18 16:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Eli Zaretskii; +Cc: 39185, Stefan Kangas
Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
> I'm not sure I understand what is the general case here. Each part of
> the report that could potentially disclose private information shall
> be identified and dealt with.
The proposal is to not include any output from the *Messages* buffer. I
have never found that data interesting when doing bug triage, and it's a
potentially severe privacy violation.
Is it your stance that you don't want to change this behaviour? If so,
I'll close this bug report.
--
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* bug#39185: [PATCH] Don't include section "Recent messages" in bug reports
2020-08-18 16:11 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
@ 2020-08-18 16:31 ` Eli Zaretskii
2020-08-18 18:16 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
0 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2020-08-18 16:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Lars Ingebrigtsen; +Cc: 39185, stefan
> From: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org>
> Cc: Stefan Kangas <stefan@marxist.se>, 39185@debbugs.gnu.org,
> drew.adams@oracle.com
> Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2020 18:11:47 +0200
>
> The proposal is to not include any output from the *Messages* buffer. I
> have never found that data interesting when doing bug triage, and it's a
> potentially severe privacy violation.
>
> Is it your stance that you don't want to change this behaviour? If so,
> I'll close this bug report.
My opinion on this is that we slowly but consistently give up more and
more useful debugging information due to privacy considerations.
However, I seem to be the odd one out here, so feel free to disregard
my opinion on this matter.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* bug#39185: [PATCH] Don't include section "Recent messages" in bug reports
2020-08-18 16:31 ` Eli Zaretskii
@ 2020-08-18 18:16 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
0 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Lars Ingebrigtsen @ 2020-08-18 18:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Eli Zaretskii; +Cc: 39185, stefan
Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
> My opinion on this is that we slowly but consistently give up more and
> more useful debugging information due to privacy considerations.
> However, I seem to be the odd one out here, so feel free to disregard
> my opinion on this matter.
OK; I've now applied Stefan's patch to Emacs 28.
--
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* bug#39185: [PATCH] Don't include section "Recent messages" in bug reports
2020-01-19 2:39 ` Stefan Kangas
2020-01-19 15:13 ` Eli Zaretskii
@ 2020-01-19 19:24 ` Drew Adams
1 sibling, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Drew Adams @ 2020-01-19 19:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stefan Kangas; +Cc: 39185
> >> Does anyone object to installing the below patch on master?
> >
> > I do. What if a user wants to include that info in a
> > particular bug report, e.g., where it's relevant?
> > Why not make it easy for a user to include it, even
> > if by default it's excluded?
>
> I don't think that feature request should stop us from moving ahead
> with this potentially serious privacy issue.
It's not about that. It's not about preventing you
from avoiding such privacy problems. It's all about
getting those fixed now. And doing it right, in a
flexible way that covers everything that could - by
users' own determinations - be a privacy issue.
> If someone later wants to re-add an option to include messages, and
> configure the bug reports along the lines you suggest, they are free
> to work on that.
That's the wrong way to deal with this issue, IMO.
It's just punting - kicking the can down the road.
And it's not as if a general solution is somehow
difficult to conceive or hard to implement. Not at
all.
I really don't understand the myopia that narrows the
focus to trying to decide what is _the_ potentially
private info, and then wants to hard-code its exclusion.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2020-08-18 18:16 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2020-01-18 23:58 bug#39185: [PATCH] Don't include section "Recent messages" in bug reports Stefan Kangas
2020-01-19 2:21 ` Drew Adams
2020-01-19 2:39 ` Stefan Kangas
2020-01-19 15:13 ` Eli Zaretskii
2020-01-19 15:27 ` Stefan Kangas
2020-01-19 15:49 ` Eli Zaretskii
2020-01-19 16:07 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
2020-01-19 16:43 ` Eli Zaretskii
2020-01-19 16:47 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
2020-01-19 17:10 ` Stefan Kangas
2020-01-19 19:20 ` Drew Adams
2020-01-20 12:33 ` Dmitry Gutov
2020-08-18 16:11 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
2020-08-18 16:31 ` Eli Zaretskii
2020-08-18 18:16 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
2020-01-19 19:24 ` Drew Adams
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).