From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Daiki Ueno Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Wherein I argue for the inclusion of libnettle in Emacs 24.5 Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2014 17:19:13 +0900 Message-ID: References: <87ha8f3jt1.fsf@building.gnus.org> <87ppn2qz0f.fsf@building.gnus.org> <87y51qcace.fsf@lifelogs.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1391588355 13557 80.91.229.3 (5 Feb 2014 08:19:15 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2014 08:19:15 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Feb 05 09:19:24 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 1WAxha-0005mi-MN for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 05 Feb 2014 09:19:22 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:57879 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WAxha-0006Us-3U for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 05 Feb 2014 03:19:22 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:36869) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WAxhX-0006Um-HH for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 05 Feb 2014 03:19:20 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WAxhW-0006NY-5r for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 05 Feb 2014 03:19:19 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:53544) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WAxhW-0006NU-3N for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 05 Feb 2014 03:19:18 -0500 Original-Received: from du-a.org ([2001:e41:db5e:fb14::1]:42959 helo=localhost.localdomain) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WAxhV-0001bi-IO for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 05 Feb 2014 03:19:17 -0500 In-Reply-To: <87y51qcace.fsf@lifelogs.com> (Ted Zlatanov's message of "Wed, 05 Feb 2014 02:00:49 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e 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:169408 Archived-At: Ted Zlatanov writes: > Please see my objection to loose coupling of encryption primitives in > particular. Didn't I post a link to the idea of this loose coupling? It is mainly for security reasons. For example, there's usually a limit of secure memory and it makes sense to do all the secret key operation in a minimal core (gpg-agent) to utilize it. I don't think you can provide the same level of security using encryption primitives within Emacs. > Right. Shelling out to an external binary every time you want to verify > a package's signature or want to encrypt/decrypt/sign data makes perfect > sense. At least it works at acceptable performance now. > Blindly entering your passphrase in an anonymous popup that says it's > from the GnuPG agent is how things are done. This could be fixed. Sounds definitely easier than importing plenty of crypto primitives from a C library. > Trusting loosely coupled components is standard industry practice. See above. > Forcing users to do all of that, or "no encryption for you" is for their > own good, on every platform where Emacs runs, from Android to W32 to Mac > OS X to many flavors of Unix. Users are just too stupid to decide these > things on their own. I don't get it. Are there any platforms where Emacs work, while GPG does not? > Is that how experts with a crypto/security background do it? I'm > understanding now. Better than letting you write encryption code for me. Case study (sorry Jose): https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-recutils/2012-04/msg00001.html I can easily imagine you will make similar (or more serious) mistakes here and there, once crypto primitives are available. -- Daiki Ueno