From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ted Zlatanov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add GPG compatible symmetric encryption command Date: Fri, 07 Feb 2014 06:09:05 -0500 Organization: =?utf-8?B?0KLQtdC+0LTQvtGAINCX0LvQsNGC0LDQvdC+0LI=?= @ Cienfuegos Message-ID: <8761orch7y.fsf@lifelogs.com> References: Reply-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1391771368 28293 80.91.229.3 (7 Feb 2014 11:09:28 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2014 11:09:28 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Feb 07 12:09:33 2014 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 1WBjJM-000523-Hx for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 07 Feb 2014 12:09:32 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:40837 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WBjJM-0000P7-2v for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 07 Feb 2014 06:09:32 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:47349) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WBjJE-0000Oo-1B for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 07 Feb 2014 06:09:29 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WBjJ7-0005Hn-Rd for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 07 Feb 2014 06:09:23 -0500 Original-Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:37490) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WBjJ7-0005Hj-Lc for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 07 Feb 2014 06:09:17 -0500 Original-Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1WBjJ4-0004nT-Is for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 07 Feb 2014 12:09:14 +0100 Original-Received: from c-98-229-61-72.hsd1.ma.comcast.net ([98.229.61.72]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 07 Feb 2014 12:09:14 +0100 Original-Received: from tzz by c-98-229-61-72.hsd1.ma.comcast.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 07 Feb 2014 12:09:14 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Mail-Followup-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-Lines: 35 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: c-98-229-61-72.hsd1.ma.comcast.net X-Face: bd.DQ~'29fIs`T_%O%C\g%6jW)yi[zuz6; d4V0`@y-~$#3P_Ng{@m+e4o<4P'#(_GJQ%TT= D}[Ep*b!\e,fBZ'j_+#"Ps?s2!4H2-Y"sx" Mail-Copies-To: never User-Agent: Gnus/5.130008 (Ma Gnus v0.8) Emacs/24.3.50 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:8KrOsP7TkbkQsZ8oBAcrRjojhso= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 80.91.229.3 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:169458 Archived-At: On Fri, 07 Feb 2014 17:36:32 +0900 Daiki Ueno wrote: DU> AFAICS, only real use-case is a symmetric encryption facility without DU> invoking a subprocess, as Lars said. This patch tries to add a command DU> for it. I mentioned many others, and so have other users. I'm sorry if you find it hard to believe our other use cases. DU> This is not intended for inclusion (at the moment, at least), but wanted DU> to show the fact: one would need fair amount of work to implement a DU> simple and reasonably secure encryption function, even if raw encryption DU> primitives are available. So, decrypt function is currently missing on DU> purpose (now that encryption is available, it is not hard to implement - DU> just do reverse), and not too secure as it uses `random'. ... DU> This is what I suggested to him before, he agreed, but has never been DU> realized. To be honest, I doubt that this feature is generally useful DU> (maybe only Ted and his auth-source.el users are complaining?) and still DU> prefer EPG because of security, but I'm tired with the repeated DU> nonsensical discussions with them. I'm thankful for your attention to users' needs and willingness to try finding a solution. I wrote similar integration code in my original libnettle patch and am sure it could use similar thoroughness. I have no reason to oppose using EPG functions to wrap the crypto primitives. But I don't see how it affects my request to include the crypto primitives from GnuTLS/libnettle/libhogweed, since you've already argued the integration work is hard and needs expert attention. Does your patch make my request less pertinent? Sorry if I'm misunderstanding. Ted