From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Juanma Barranquero Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [PATCH] lisp/server.el: Introduction of server-auth-key variable Date: Sun, 1 May 2011 01:59:25 +0200 Message-ID: References: <835b9d42b15c18e5adf7381138f347061fbc17e8.1298381336.git.mina86@mina86.com> <87fwoz5oz1.fsf@erwin.mina86.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1304208015 32248 80.91.229.12 (1 May 2011 00:00:15 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 1 May 2011 00:00:15 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Michal Nazarewicz , Stefan Monnier , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Michal Nazarewicz Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun May 01 02:00:11 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QGK53-0005um-Sk for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 01 May 2011 02:00:10 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:50274 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QGK53-0008VN-HG for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 30 Apr 2011 20:00:09 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:56954) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QGK51-0008TF-DB for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 30 Apr 2011 20:00:08 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QGK50-0002Ql-4J for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 30 Apr 2011 20:00:07 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-yw0-f41.google.com ([209.85.213.41]:52334) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QGK4z-0002Pa-RB for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 30 Apr 2011 20:00:05 -0400 Original-Received: by ywa1 with SMTP id 1so2001492ywa.0 for ; Sat, 30 Apr 2011 17:00:05 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=sfnuGuqqvmlp/91fbOdG5Id5fzIcV09IMuQwc5LavhE=; b=lr7i2Q1JZeuu2yRTEpD2KYyObdkx8dtfqijhoTUSiR3GYVY0F1cocgwIlO9sBbKABm LmBFWpbdmDEqMRx0Nygv8HWfvmnig+3OM5Sv+POmqGCJMQk5FP8nfO1fdDCPBAY3wHWN 10pep/TtPmAWat7MI0tUi3OaTpqU2/oMwIOYY= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=LY/xL9B2GMsijXwFAQgXS/6h/G62lOEmVwrt87nWh67BPE8sI+aF4g2K8AdiF+Ppjx mF8KCDJTjxHAKzU0VgVeB3Oaw5e1kY2bdhO9APZeQsANXYIOTjVJJDGhowRMu/faxA3W 4z1+nZPStm5P5wFAozo2VPW5ikaHQu/VSldeA= Original-Received: by 10.236.193.100 with SMTP id j64mr8275923yhn.294.1304208005118; Sat, 30 Apr 2011 17:00:05 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.147.182.5 with HTTP; Sat, 30 Apr 2011 16:59:25 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <87fwoz5oz1.fsf@erwin.mina86.com> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-Received-From: 209.85.213.41 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:138934 Archived-At: 2011/5/1 Michal Nazarewicz : > Depending on how paranoid are we, MD5 could feel too weak though. > (Also, one could wish for HMAC.) I am not feeling particularly paranoid just now, seeing as we've been using a cleartext authentication key for the past few years... > Actually, server would have to generate the nonce. =C2=A0Otherwise, the > authentication scheme would be prone to replay attacks and would really > defy the purpose of nonce. OK, I in fact prefer to generate the nonce in elisp. > That would still break backward compatibility, wouldn't it? =C2=A0The old > servers would not accept this command anyway. =C2=A0Unless server would i= ssue > it to client just after making connection. =C2=A0From what I see, the old > clients would "only" print error message. Yeah, but a failed -auth closes the connection and deletes the process, while an unknown command just issues an error message. One way or another, I don't think we can avoid the error message on the emacsclient side. > In the worst case, the client could first try the new authenticating > scheme and on error reconnect with the old scheme. Yes, but as the connection is closed, that adds a bit of complexity to emacsclient that I'd like to avoid if possible. =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Juanma