From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?utf-8?Q?=C3=93scar_Fuentes?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: GnuTLS for W32 Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2012 03:35:02 +0100 Message-ID: <87fwfyltm1.fsf@wanadoo.es> References: <87aa68dfao.fsf@lifelogs.com> <87ty4fbje8.fsf@lifelogs.com> <83ehvjs8t5.fsf@gnu.org> <87pqf3bcom.fsf@lifelogs.com> <83boqns68o.fsf@gnu.org> <87liprazr1.fsf@lifelogs.com> <83wr9bqez3.fsf@gnu.org> <87y5tr9dwv.fsf_-_@lifelogs.com> <87k45alwgb.fsf@wanadoo.es> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1325471725 29066 80.91.229.12 (2 Jan 2012 02:35:25 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2012 02:35:25 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Jan 02 03:35:21 2012 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 1RhXk9-0001WW-CF for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 02 Jan 2012 03:35:21 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:55554 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RhXk8-00008R-Px for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 01 Jan 2012 21:35:20 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:48993) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RhXk6-00008E-T6 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 01 Jan 2012 21:35:19 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RhXk5-0001JE-Cg for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 01 Jan 2012 21:35:18 -0500 Original-Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]:53149) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RhXk5-0001J4-1E for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 01 Jan 2012 21:35:17 -0500 Original-Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RhXk3-0001VL-Fu for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 02 Jan 2012 03:35:15 +0100 Original-Received: from 225.red-79-147-11.dynamicip.rima-tde.net ([79.147.11.225]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 02 Jan 2012 03:35:15 +0100 Original-Received: from ofv by 225.red-79-147-11.dynamicip.rima-tde.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 02 Jan 2012 03:35:15 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 29 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 225.red-79-147-11.dynamicip.rima-tde.net User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.91 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:5rJv8pZsqmXy58nLFAiwYqh5Ob0= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-Received-From: 80.91.229.12 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:147151 Archived-At: Juanma Barranquero writes: > On Mon, Jan 2, 2012 at 02:33, Óscar Fuentes wrote: > >> Security default settings must be appropriate for those who are at risk. > > That assumes that those at risk are many, Do we implement security only when many users are at risk? > or the cost of these defaults are small. We can now discuss (without > any real data, I think) just how many Windows users of Emacs are at > risk, and how convenient or inconvenient is to assume distributing the > GnuTLS binary vs. pointing the users to an alternative download place. Including the GnuTLS binary with the official binary packages shouldn't be too costly, if we consider how rare Emacs releases are. As for the other option, GnuTLS support could be prominently advertised, not just listed as another item on NEWS. > And, just to put things in perspective, until now Emacs had no GnuTLS > support and we haven't seen a flood of network-related security > reports from Windows users. Shrugh. Security-wise, this way of thinking is responsible for lots of disasters. I wouldn't detect if someone were eavesdropping my network communications, nor would you.