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: can emacs use the mac os x keychain? Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2010 21:53:39 -0500 Organization: =?utf-8?B?0KLQtdC+0LTQvtGAINCX0LvQsNGC0LDQvdC+0LI=?= @ Cienfuegos Message-ID: <87d3u3cabw.fsf@lifelogs.com> References: <370a1897-25aa-418f-9631-1570dfa99de3@z7g2000yqb.googlegroups.com> <87633kaess.fsf@lifelogs.com> <8d7c78ee-6ba8-448a-8f86-3d585e1af77f@u32g2000vbc.googlegroups.com> <87vd8z2myy.fsf@lifelogs.com> <01ea3506-d715-491d-b360-3abf34e98013@i31g2000yqm.googlegroups.com> <87r5iq1hjk.fsf@lifelogs.com> <871vanu08g.fsf@lifelogs.com> <87sk31nlv7.fsf@lifelogs.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1280631243 7645 80.91.229.12 (1 Aug 2010 02:54:03 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2010 02:54:03 +0000 (UTC) Cc: adrian.b.robert@gmail.com To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Aug 01 04:54:02 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OfOgZ-0006CP-RV for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 01 Aug 2010 04:54:00 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:35216 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OfOgZ-0004YO-Cu for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 31 Jul 2010 22:53:59 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=51253 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OfOgU-0004YI-1I for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 31 Jul 2010 22:53:54 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OfOgS-0001T4-FZ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 31 Jul 2010 22:53:53 -0400 Original-Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]:39286) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OfOgS-0001Ss-0i for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 31 Jul 2010 22:53:52 -0400 Original-Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OfOgM-0006Am-EH for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 01 Aug 2010 04:53:46 +0200 Original-Received: from c-98-227-29-141.hsd1.il.comcast.net ([98.227.29.141]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 01 Aug 2010 04:53:46 +0200 Original-Received: from tzz by c-98-227-29-141.hsd1.il.comcast.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 01 Aug 2010 04:53:46 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 25 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: c-98-227-29-141.hsd1.il.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" User-Agent: Gnus/5.110011 (No Gnus v0.11) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:zKZKSGKYeKfhYiNz0VsM7FGxdMU= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:128074 Archived-At: On Sun, 01 Aug 2010 10:44:35 +0900 YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu wrote: >>>>>> On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 08:24:28 -0500, Ted Zlatanov said: >> If /usr/bin/security can handle regular and internet keychains (the >> two types David Reitter mentioned) then it's sufficient in terms of >> backend functionality. I don't think it can ever be as secure, >> however, as a direct C call, so for security I'd rather use direct C >> calls if that's an option. YM> One drawback of the use of /usr/bin/security would be that the user YM> might grant the generic command `security' access to the item by YM> adding it to the "trusted applications" list in order to avoid the YM> application access confirmation dialog. YM> It might be desirable to call Keychain API directly rather than via YM> the `security' command so that the keychain can know which application YM> wants to access the item in a more specific way. Thank you for your explanation. Since we are in agreement on using the C API directly, I hope you, David, or Adrian (or someone else willing to contribute) find the time to implement these calls and provide an ELisp layer on top. Thank you Ted