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: NaCl support for Emacs Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2012 06:45:49 -0500 Organization: =?utf-8?B?0KLQtdC+0LTQvtGAINCX0LvQsNGC0LDQvdC+0LI=?= @ Cienfuegos Message-ID: <87ty43g4r6.fsf@lifelogs.com> References: <87lipl22xm.fsf@lifelogs.com> <87boqh20ha.fsf@lifelogs.com> <871urc46c9.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <739bsoysp.fsf@news.eternal-september.org> <87ty47r5yt.fsf@lifelogs.com> <87k452p5u3.fsf@lifelogs.com> <87liphne9e.fsf_-_@lifelogs.com> <87fwfon7gl.fsf@lifelogs.com> <87hb04icxl.fsf@lifelogs.com> <87pqesgwnj.fsf@lifelogs.com> <4F0BAA1C.5020804@dancol.org> Reply-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1326195980 31221 80.91.229.12 (10 Jan 2012 11:46:20 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2012 11:46:20 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Jan 10 12:46:16 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 1Rka9g-0003X9-Du for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 10 Jan 2012 12:46:16 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:35806 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Rka9f-0002de-W0 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 10 Jan 2012 06:46:15 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:36953) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Rka9W-0002cj-3r for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Jan 2012 06:46:14 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Rka9U-0000va-UG for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Jan 2012 06:46:06 -0500 Original-Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]:42003) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Rka9U-0000vS-N0 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Jan 2012 06:46:04 -0500 Original-Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Rka9Q-0003Ns-MB for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Jan 2012 12:46:00 +0100 Original-Received: from c-76-28-40-19.hsd1.vt.comcast.net ([76.28.40.19]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 10 Jan 2012 12:46:00 +0100 Original-Received: from tzz by c-76-28-40-19.hsd1.vt.comcast.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 10 Jan 2012 12:46:00 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Mail-Followup-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-Lines: 17 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: c-76-28-40-19.hsd1.vt.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" Mail-Copies-To: never User-Agent: Gnus/5.110018 (No Gnus v0.18) Emacs/24.0.90 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:jF+afbhg3qMUgnCdV1bDVjzCm8w= 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:147561 Archived-At: On Mon, 09 Jan 2012 19:01:48 -0800 Daniel Colascione wrote: DC> On 1/9/12 5:43 PM, Ted Zlatanov wrote: SM> I don't think Emacs should reinvent every wheel. GPG does this job well SM> and using it means that those files can be decrypted without Emacs. >> >> Calling out to an external process is less secure than using built-in >> encryption primitives. So while in general you're right, in this case >> I'll respectfully disagree. It may be convenient but it's not secure. DC> If an attacker can read the bytes sent over a pipe between your Emacs DC> and its GPG subprocess, you've already lost. I'm not sure what DC> reasonable definition of "secure" you meant to use here. I'm being polite. Ted