From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Tino Calancha Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#30190: 27.0.50; term run in line mode shows user passwords Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 08:28:20 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: References: <87r2qjh0fs.fsf@gmail.com> <87mv17nwe4.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <87efm259s5.fsf@gmail.com> <83vafe9f16.fsf@gnu.org> <87wozfkt9t.fsf@gmail.com> <87o9kiejd4.fsf@gmail.com> <83606q6xr7.fsf@gnu.org> <873718qpme.fsf@gmail.com> <87in6erte5.fsf@gmail.com> <83efh1s9s3.fsf@gnu.org> <87602drqan.fsf@gmail.com> <8336xgsvt3.fsf@gnu.org> <878t6892pv.fsf@gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=US-ASCII X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1531956430 4732 195.159.176.226 (18 Jul 2018 23:27:10 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2018 23:27:10 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07) Cc: 30190@debbugs.gnu.org, Tino Calancha , Noam Postavsky To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Jul 19 01:27:06 2018 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ffvqa-000155-Vm for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 01:27:05 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:38667 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ffvsg-0008VD-93 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 19:29:14 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:34409) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ffvsX-0008Uw-JX for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 19:29:06 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ffvsU-0001ev-FV for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 19:29:05 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:42269) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ffvsU-0001ep-BO for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 19:29:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ffvsT-0004Ju-Tg for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 19:29:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Tino Calancha Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2018 23:29:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 30190 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: confirmed security Original-Received: via spool by 30190-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B30190.153195651116569 (code B ref 30190); Wed, 18 Jul 2018 23:29:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 30190) by debbugs.gnu.org; 18 Jul 2018 23:28:31 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47287 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ffvrz-0004JB-Ke for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 19:28:31 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-pg1-f170.google.com ([209.85.215.170]:35684) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ffvry-0004Iy-HK for 30190@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 19:28:30 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-pg1-f170.google.com with SMTP id e6-v6so2695909pgv.2 for <30190@debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 16:28:30 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:date:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:message-id:references :user-agent:mime-version; bh=+pD39mwP097U2C5mbgmvWVoSGUOZPg3AeEw7OvozFRY=; b=nFVmD2tkEhNaKKAFOfyM3tNjNOLZvaZXdgPgTXcWCFkXO8yfros+tSOuxo25Ryl5II R/7+F+r5khub2/ruVWBsu+KQ8QEBzK3wSn5ho4ba5Xjiq15Vf/X7ewixCGZ+xuTAPaq/ Ur6i7S1ErUIU0KFR8CWTiZsHKU9ORzG5n9G4/pC8ZRd7f5OGQjPEqt8wgzuSZiBOUBXW 5E0MUiIftfyJ6eqcWT3jnkyEP/QH8Wx3nL2HT2pEE7j0mUNPKawjVbXizV0AIFPprKNf 5wyKecrOMWgso5uzXKxxQnzyQi+olEHf+30/z5QOkeJTSyVw/6rQD6oZAjCLJSOyomtG 9dzA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:date:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:message-id :references:user-agent:mime-version; bh=+pD39mwP097U2C5mbgmvWVoSGUOZPg3AeEw7OvozFRY=; b=VLuuQUvrB0y3TaJ9MlmN9v8S85yXB20vLXpDbymfN45L+lvcAlf1LKCMNFr6Sxl9pe EwtX5z7bh4D56B/Ahmi2UoKr/5rqPGvScmaUx5lBd6luF4Y7PB/Y+SK2/gw+KIek80yE LOmy1YNcmr24uCwBjkBqelM36Uc1mzTu9Jyjy17ktylzANq+BJfqthKk+ia/lwx4ZBhf 0x3YCAcLfRIyqx7kxUwp29KZgmSbaXDIdrmaUMUGbZFCRUmTY3GEK+bqueFbmnyxtZp/ E9O/TmxRqaTydoM5lonARhukD1VO9ZKT3akGiVZ1YO5cxtM27WEH7VBSF3+iaFjHAaxQ 5hgA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlHfBsMKsKtk3It9Q6jzc2QqwWWtKYh47XEfX1h3nK4/YjfOCcIO WhnnoYX2f46IP2miPtLknr0= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpcUlNj8JM5XaXWeaCWvj/AA83sC1dkvqyXMOfMZlzk7FqBS+GtgtnSid5QaAzTfgmnycA3FEA== X-Received: by 2002:a65:5a8a:: with SMTP id c10-v6mr7360805pgt.389.1531956504732; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 16:28:24 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from calancha-pc.dy.bbexcite.jp (195.139.137.133.dy.bbexcite.jp. [133.137.139.195]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id t12-v6sm6593376pgg.72.2018.07.18.16.28.22 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 18 Jul 2018 16:28:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Original-From: Tino Calancha X-X-Sender: calancha@calancha-pc.dy.bbexcite.jp In-Reply-To: X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 208.118.235.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:148649 Archived-At: On Wed, 18 Jul 2018, Stefan Monnier wrote: >>> More specifically, shouldn't `read-passwd` do that for us (hence if it >>> doesn't yet, then the right patch is to add this let-binding to >>> `read-passwd`)? >> I don't think so. `read-passwd' uses ?. as default. The docstring suggest >> us to let-bind `read-hide-char' in case we wish another char. > > But why does term-mode want to use a different char? > What's so different about term-mode? Of course, nothing. I imagine it's for historical reasons; probably someone introduced ?* at some point in term.el and nobody cared about it. >> Alternatively we could use ?. always as default, and change >> `term-send-invisble'. > > I don't understand what change to term-send-invisble you're thinking of. I mean not passing non-nil 2nd argument here: (when (not (stringp str)) (setq str (term-read-noecho "Non-echoed text: " t))) ;; Above code is from `term-send-invisible'. >> Personaly, I prefer ?* because my vision is quite poor and ?. looks too >> small :-| > > But your vision is not poor only in term-mode, right? > So, what you're really saying here is that you'd like to change > read-passwd to use ?* instead of ?., isn't it? If so, I have nothing > against it, but it's a separate concern from that of bug#30190 and it > should apply to all uses of read-passwd. Let's be realistic, these kind of changes usually are not welcome. Not a problem though. It's very minor issue and many people would love ?. Since you look interested I tell a bit more; while I am introducing a hidden text (usually a password), I count the number of ?. to see if matches the length of the password. This is a fast mental check, don't bother to select the minibuffer contents and check its size. I find easier to count ?* than ?. But more than this personal issue from a handicapped person (visually), I care more about the lack of consistency, as you do: yeah, we should present uniformly the same char for any command hiding its input. How to achieve that? I am sure Eli find the proper way.