From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stephen Leake Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: ELPA policy Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2015 04:33:08 -0600 Message-ID: <86pozcc1ln.fsf@stephe-leake.org> References: <87ziyuaqhl.fsf@petton.fr>> > <87lha5snji.fsf@isaac.fritz.box> > <87d1vhsmuj.fsf@isaac.fritz.box> > <878u65slue.fsf@isaac.fritz.box> > <874mgtsjwn.fsf@isaac.fritz.box> > <867flp8nb7.fsf@stephe-leake.org> <9e33129a-07d0-4abe-a94e-32d6d881519b@default> > <86bnb06g7g.fsf@stephe-leake.org>> > <86oaezemp9.fsf@stephe-leake.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1447513375 6171 80.91.229.3 (14 Nov 2015 15:02:55 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2015 15:02:55 +0000 (UTC) Cc: jwiegley@gmail.com, drew.adams@oracle.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Richard Stallman Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Nov 14 16:02:42 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ZxcLh-0006PC-O2 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 14 Nov 2015 16:02:41 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:35155 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZxcLh-0006Bm-7t for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 14 Nov 2015 10:02:41 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:40082) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZxY96-0005sW-Bt for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 14 Nov 2015 05:33:25 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZxY93-0002fy-6o for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 14 Nov 2015 05:33:24 -0500 Original-Received: from gproxy10-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com ([69.89.20.226]:40537) by eggs.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZxY92-0002ed-Vy for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 14 Nov 2015 05:33:21 -0500 Original-Received: (qmail 9508 invoked by uid 0); 14 Nov 2015 10:33:16 -0000 Original-Received: from unknown (HELO cmgw4) (10.0.90.85) by gproxy10.mail.unifiedlayer.com with SMTP; 14 Nov 2015 10:33:16 -0000 Original-Received: from host114.hostmonster.com ([74.220.207.114]) by cmgw4 with id hNZD1r00F2UdiVW01NZGm1; Sat, 14 Nov 2015 03:33:16 -0700 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.1 cv=IekUBwaa c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=CQdxDb2CKd3SRg4I0/XZPQ==:117 a=CQdxDb2CKd3SRg4I0/XZPQ==:17 a=DsvgjBjRAAAA:8 a=f5113yIGAAAA:8 a=9i_RQKNPAAAA:8 a=hEr_IkYJT6EA:10 a=x_XPkuGwIRMA:10 a=qtqOOiqGOCEA:10 a=mDV3o1hIAAAA:8 a=lmXnmULOLa7XunpSSvQA:9 Original-Received: from [76.218.37.33] (port=61618 helo=TAKVER2) by host114.hostmonster.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1ZxY8v-00006u-6h; Sat, 14 Nov 2015 03:33:13 -0700 In-Reply-To: (Richard Stallman's message of "Thu, 12 Nov 2015 17:33:03 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (windows-nt) X-Identified-User: {2442:host114.hostmonster.com:stephele:stephe-leake.org} {sentby:smtp auth 76.218.37.33 authed with stephen_leake@stephe-leake.org} X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-Received-From: 69.89.20.226 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:194453 Archived-At: Richard Stallman writes: > > We will have replaced the security of private machines with whatever web > > login that web page requires; that's a huge step backwards. > > I think you are concerned that someone might break the security on that other > server and then install changes on it using Drew's account. > > In general, someone who breaks the security on a machine used by > an Emacs contributor might be able to insert changes in Emacs > by pretending to be that contributor. I don't think this is > fundamentally different. But maybe the web site's security is > not quite as good. Yes, my concern is about the strength of the web security, as opposed to the strength of Drew's private machine. I suppose there's no a priori reason to assume one is more secure than the other; maybe I'm just reacting to all the news reports about hacking. -- -- Stephe