From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#7487: 24.0.50; Gnus nnimap broken Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2010 15:56:10 -0500 Message-ID: References: <8739q54g7x.fsf@lifelogs.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1292016161 20431 80.91.229.12 (10 Dec 2010 21:22:41 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2010 21:22:41 +0000 (UTC) Cc: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org To: Ted Zlatanov Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Dec 10 22:22:37 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PRAQE-0001sF-2J for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 10 Dec 2010 22:22:34 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:40923 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PRAQD-0005cC-Hs for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 10 Dec 2010 16:22:33 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=54350 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PRAQ2-0005Xg-1Z for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 10 Dec 2010 16:22:23 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PRAQ1-0001I7-0W for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 10 Dec 2010 16:22:21 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:58845) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PRAQ0-0001I3-U6 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 10 Dec 2010 16:22:20 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PR9vi-00019O-Iq; Fri, 10 Dec 2010 15:51:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Stefan Monnier Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-To: owner@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org, bugs@gnus.org Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2010 20:51:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 7487 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs,gnus X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B.12920142124355 (code B ref -1); Fri, 10 Dec 2010 20:51:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 10 Dec 2010 20:50:12 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PR9uu-00018B-3b for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 10 Dec 2010 15:50:12 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PR9us-00017r-M3 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 10 Dec 2010 15:50:10 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PRA0j-0003FM-FY for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 10 Dec 2010 15:56:14 -0500 Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]:59075) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PRA0j-0003F7-D3 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 10 Dec 2010 15:56:13 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=45370 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PRA0i-0004UN-Ci for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 10 Dec 2010 15:56:13 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PRA0h-0003EK-74 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 10 Dec 2010 15:56:12 -0500 Original-Received: from ironport2-out.teksavvy.com ([206.248.154.183]:25459 helo=ironport2-out.pppoe.ca) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PRA0h-0003EC-4Q for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 10 Dec 2010 15:56:11 -0500 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Aj8LACgjAk3O+KIs/2dsb2JhbACic4Eaeb9KhUoEhGSOBQ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.59,326,1288584000"; d="scan'208";a="85136642" Original-Received: from 206-248-162-44.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO ceviche.home) ([206.248.162.44]) by ironport2-out.pppoe.ca with ESMTP/TLS/ADH-AES256-SHA; 10 Dec 2010 15:56:10 -0500 Original-Received: by ceviche.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 25D056616B; Fri, 10 Dec 2010 15:56:10 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <8739q54g7x.fsf@lifelogs.com> (Ted Zlatanov's message of "Fri, 10 Dec 2010 12:48:02 -0600") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2010 15:51:02 -0500 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) 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: , Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:42403 Archived-At: >>>> that I'm tempted to go back to just storing this data in the plain-text >>>> ~/.authinfo file until all this has been worked out. >>> No!!!! Or only after prompting the user five times for >>> (different) confirmation. LMI> If you look at other widely used software packages, like Firefox, they LMI> default to just storing the passwords in an (obfuscated) non-encrypted LMI> file. I don't think that's such a bad default. > It's a terrible default IMO. But you knew I'd say that :) I also find it terrible. Tho it is at least protected by a 3-way prompt (tho only 1 rather than 5). LMI> If you want a more complicated credential storage setup, then that LMI> should be a user option, not a default. At present, the ~/.authinfo.gpg LMI> credential storage is not something you can present to a normal user and LMI> expect them to understand at all. > How about a .sgpg or .spg extension that signals EPA/EPG that only > symmetric encryption is desired? I think that will only push the problem elsewhere, which is "which file name to use: .authinfo.gpg or .authinfo.spg". It seems simpler to just let the user configure the behavior she wants. By default just use symmetric encryption. Stefan