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: Network security manager Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2014 10:36:10 -0500 Organization: =?utf-8?B?0KLQtdC+0LTQvtGAINCX0LvQsNGC0LDQvdC+0LI=?= @ Cienfuegos Message-ID: <87wq6rcidx.fsf@lifelogs.com> References: <87oas4h555.fsf@lifelogs.com> <87a93oh180.fsf@lifelogs.com> <83h9xw9zg3.fsf@gnu.org> <83d28k9yb9.fsf@gnu.org> <83ppcj9740.fsf@gnu.org> <871toze1tl.fsf@lifelogs.com> Reply-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1416411382 11585 80.91.229.3 (19 Nov 2014 15:36:22 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2014 15:36:22 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Nov 19 16:36:15 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Xr7Ij-0004BJ-NU for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 19 Nov 2014 16:36:13 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:59073 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xr7Ij-0003Nr-Be for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 19 Nov 2014 10:36:13 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:50239) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xr7Ia-0003Lw-Kd for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Nov 2014 10:36:10 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xr7IU-00066M-Pb for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Nov 2014 10:36:04 -0500 Original-Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:50625) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xr7IU-00065j-Hq for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Nov 2014 10:35:58 -0500 Original-Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Xr7IT-00044v-LD for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Nov 2014 16:35:57 +0100 Original-Received: from c-98-229-61-72.hsd1.ma.comcast.net ([98.229.61.72]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 19 Nov 2014 16:35:57 +0100 Original-Received: from tzz by c-98-229-61-72.hsd1.ma.comcast.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 19 Nov 2014 16:35:57 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Mail-Followup-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-Lines: 32 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: c-98-229-61-72.hsd1.ma.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/5.130012 (Ma Gnus v0.12) Emacs/25.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:G8GGfGnqjlGhNP8BizqOb2Vhv9g= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 80.91.229.3 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:177762 Archived-At: On Wed, 19 Nov 2014 15:45:52 +0100 Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen wrote: LMI> Ted Zlatanov writes: >> Would it work to use the logic of "the buffer that initiated the >> connection is in the foreground"? In that case, we could store the >> buffer name as an optional record in the process info structure-- >> `open-network-stream' could figure it out mostly automatically? LMI> Hm... so shr would tell `url-retrieve' that the buffer that the "user LMI> buffer" for the request is "*eww*", and then if that's the buffer that's LMI> active when url.el finally has decided which server to connect to, and LMI> the NSM decides to query the user -- then NSM would only query the user LMI> if the user's active buffer is the same buffer? Yes! LMI> If you `M-x eww RET http://google.com RET', then we don't create the LMI> *eww* buffer until we have downloaded the HTML. (Which will actually be LMI> from https://www.google.com, since there's a redirect.) Meanwhile the LMI> user may well have left the buffer she typed `M-x eww' in, but that LMI> (probably) shouldn't stop NSM from querying about whether the user LMI> really wants to visit the version of https://www.google.com that seems LMI> to be signed by an invalid Chinese CA for some strange reason or LMI> other... You could create the *eww* buffer immediately? Or just look for that buffer name (if you store just the name in the process)? At medium or lower `nsm-security-level', I wouldn't expect to be queried in the case you describe. But at high or above, I would. Ted