From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: security of the emacs package system, elpa, melpa and marmalade Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2013 23:50:57 +0900 Message-ID: <87txh2z7la.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> References: <523FEE1B.9020408@binary-island.eu> <87y56gymvz.fsf@flea.lifelogs.com> <874n93ze2r.fsf@flea.lifelogs.com> <87zjquxwz0.fsf@flea.lifelogs.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1380552685 24797 80.91.229.3 (30 Sep 2013 14:51:25 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2013 14:51:25 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Sep 30 16:51:27 2013 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 1VQeop-0006Nb-Iv for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 30 Sep 2013 16:51:27 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:49081 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VQeop-00019B-0j for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 30 Sep 2013 10:51:27 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:43604) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VQeof-00013u-VM for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 30 Sep 2013 10:51:25 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VQeoV-00087y-SA for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 30 Sep 2013 10:51:17 -0400 Original-Received: from mgmt2.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp ([130.158.97.224]:33618) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VQeoV-00087A-Ip for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 30 Sep 2013 10:51:07 -0400 Original-Received: from uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp [130.158.99.156]) by mgmt2.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 060FC970990 for ; Mon, 30 Sep 2013 23:50:58 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: by uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix, from userid 1000) id B66DD1A3246; Mon, 30 Sep 2013 23:50:57 +0900 (JST) In-Reply-To: <87zjquxwz0.fsf@flea.lifelogs.com> X-Mailer: VM undefined under 21.5 (beta32) "habanero" b0d40183ac79 XEmacs Lucid (x86_64-unknown-linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 130.158.97.224 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:163728 Archived-At: Ted Zlatanov writes: > Hmm, looks like libnettle (brought in with GnuTLS) already provides most > of the infrastructure needed. The question for me is, should I bother > with a full OpenPGP signature emulation, No, don't just "emulate" it, implement the protocol accurately. > or is it sufficient to implement RSA/DSA/EC-based signatures for > Emacs internal use only? No. In security, multiple implementations are a very good thing as long as they're used to cross-check correct implementation of a protocol and don't define their own protocols.