From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Lars Ingebrigtsen Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: The netsec thread Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2019 21:08:05 +0200 Message-ID: References: <83bmb214ez.fsf@gnu.org> <837elq13me.fsf@gnu.org> <83h8kqwukq.fsf@gnu.org> <86zhyh7nli.fsf@gmail.com> <86pnzdrn8u.fsf@gmail.com> <834l36koak.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="236937"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: Robert Pluim , emacs-devel@gnu.org, andrewjmoreton@gmail.com, wyuenho@gmail.com, npostavs@gmail.com To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Jul 28 21:08:32 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hroX1-000zRy-GR for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 28 Jul 2019 21:08:31 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:46420 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from ) id 1hroWz-0000xn-Sb for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 28 Jul 2019 15:08:29 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:40282) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from ) id 1hroWh-0000xf-HI for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 28 Jul 2019 15:08:12 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hroWg-00042T-EM for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 28 Jul 2019 15:08:11 -0400 Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.231.51]:54758) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hroWg-00041m-7T; Sun, 28 Jul 2019 15:08:10 -0400 Original-Received: from cm-84.212.202.86.getinternet.no ([84.212.202.86] helo=stories) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hroWb-0006tC-SO; Sun, 28 Jul 2019 21:08:08 +0200 Face: iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAADAAAAAwBAMAAAClLOS0AAAAGFBMVEUCDDPo6NwQG0ALFTsA Bi3+/u4GEDY+R2UazpW6AAACZklEQVQ4jYWUQW/bMAyFCTlQzj0IuXpUZ181qVCuxmLk7oPhq2IX 6rVzmunv70lxtw4bNgaGDH0mH8lQoodhUOMw/mGk/tz7D3hQGX3Aw/2dmLlNKT3AxuGQDqmYGqnP tuuqGPfjtOs3+7yBYl/H6Smvkvb+d6Am5/t9wuv500hdiPE5xFOIs5qO6bF9eez77ksGPhLgBt5S egO4jHTW1lpttbazGub18bpu4KPGYNmIFqmdEerEPLN2FosazHN3TLwroFuiW5bFOWcBeseJeScR qotxwQ+WPSTbdLVPFdI9QxptwQOPWnznlrmWCNVTsR1JAVA1dmVuMjizZfhoLADGaG64yhpnSDu7 aOetmsyTEfzKp03cOY+sFoAmaAFf2VxKqDULwtTExPPKwmiAEwpAo0q6E1dNvLJ4nS+l8pyry+lm EFamq8gaqMNtWR1YNIGbijkDHzeDBz4Irq5YbHVwebJ4srqx87Et6cq7QwXxNrkgAh3TReVeZXnH 1qqDrT0JQ41+GUliV5fEIO6pocWQkceRKJZYstRhgiG/gRP/NLSEsGsoZtDdpcO9V1STDxSpLVOC At1dI4OAaaJjqcOWOnQJVUuTwYuijqSUIbcR4hq6MSIUwPld2ubKo8FH+KePahP3Po/PpGUtKYea 4eFcg3lz7Fz2qKtfwOp7D7UaWCNOQCiAvoN+Hh+SAGxFTdYUj/vwoI76NvB+5dC5uRbwiKH0ffHx NmixdvCvwpKBlNFXfvHhNukYUBAiO1XOhw8aUnQbXsu45gOq6DmfReZyuIf0LW2mKJ/893vh4/Xx r7vk7+AHYDoITYamAOAAAAAASUVORK5CYII= In-Reply-To: <834l36koak.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Sun, 28 Jul 2019 21:27:15 +0300") X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 80.91.231.51 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:238979 Archived-At: I've now done some testing of the netsec branch, and it basically looks good to me. It's a bit too detailed in the warnings it presents to the user -- the original idea was to keep the level of detail down so that it won't scare away everyone but security professionals, and it's now rather scary. I've only skimmed the patch set -- it's 2200 lines, but I've got one question to Robert: The patches that add `network-lookup-address-info' went into the netsec branch. Was there any particular reason for that? They seem rather unrelated. (It does look like a useful addition, though.) So my plan here is to wait a few days to see whether there are any further comments, and then merge the branch into the trunk. I will then do some cosmetic touch-ups; mostly moving all new details displayed on the first warning screen to the "details" page. Sound OK to everybody? -- (domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.) bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no