From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Tim X Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: My emacs was upgraded and I am a novice again Date: Sun, 07 Oct 2007 15:45:53 +1000 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: <87sl4n32b2.fsf@lion.rapttech.com.au> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1191739246 22638 80.91.229.12 (7 Oct 2007 06:40:46 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 7 Oct 2007 06:40:46 +0000 (UTC) To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Oct 07 08:40:43 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1IePof-0008Gu-PH for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 07 Oct 2007 08:40:42 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IePoa-0004L5-Hf for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 07 Oct 2007 02:40:36 -0400 Original-Path: shelby.stanford.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!syros.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!feeder.news-service.com!feeder6.cambrium.nl!feeder1.cambrium.nl!feed.tweaknews.nl!138.199.65.86.MISMATCH!sn-xt-ams-06!sn-xt-ams-04!sn-ams!sn-feed-ams-03!sn-post-ams-01!sn-post-sjc-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail Original-Newsgroups: gnu.emacs.help User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.1.50 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:ZRMSWn+S0yWuCKLOo8JvRUQfVME= Original-X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Original-Lines: 72 Original-Xref: shelby.stanford.edu gnu.emacs.help:152674 X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:48180 Archived-At: Bruce Korb writes: > This addition: (setq disabled-command-function nil) > seemed reasonable. It isn't quite a complete cover tho: > >> The local variables list in configure.in >> contains values that may not be safe (*). >> >> Do you want to apply it? You can type >> y -- to apply the local variables list. >> n -- to ignore the local variables list. >> ! -- to apply the local variables list, and permanently mark these >> values (*) as safe (in the future, they will be set automatically.) >> >> mode : autoconf-mode >> indent-tabs-mode : nil >> sh-indentation : 2 > > OK, so I've made it permanent so ``sh-indentation 2'' > will no longer be treated with suspicion. The *NEXT* > suspicious thing will interrupt me again, however. > I think that this: > > '(safe-local-variable-values (quote ((sh-indentation . 2)))) > > should be *ENTIRELY* disabled, not just the one "sh-indentation" > entry. I don't exactly know who thinks I need protection from > nefarious things like two-space indentation, but the reason I > had that assignment is because I wanted that assignment in there. > >> There was never such a user setting in Emacs. You always had to >> enable each command individually (unless you are an advanced user and >> know how to set a function to nil without causing damage). > > The problem, of course, are the newly added protections with > less-than-obvious ways of telling emacs, "Please stop protecting > me." In the case above, it is not a disabled command issue. > It is some collection of variable values that someone thought > would be "dangerous". So, I guess, in the end, I'm asking for > an enhancement: > > (custom-set-variables > '(protective-mode nil)) > > and from that day forth, never worry about emacs protecting me > from myself ever again. :-} Thank you! Cheers - Bruce > > I think it is resonable to request such a feature and recommend you send such a request to the emacs-devel list. However, it should be explicitly noted that - 1. This is not a new feature. This protection was included in emacs 21 and I think emacs 20. 2. The reason isn't so much to protect you from yourself, but protect you from the malicious aims of others. Theoretically, someone could put a very malicious (even virus/trojan like) bit of code in the local variables section of a file. Opening that file in your emacs would cause this to be executed and could have some nasty or unexpected consequences. However, I think as long as the user has to actively disable checking/verification, it is reasonable to allow such an option. I don't like software that tries to be too much of a Nanny - if I want to do something stupid, I should be allowed to! Tim -- tcross (at) rapttech dot com dot au