From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs RPC security Date: Tue, 03 May 2011 00:56:42 +0200 Organization: Programmerer Ingebrigtsen Message-ID: References: <87d3kal0za.fsf@lifelogs.com> <874o5mky4o.fsf@lifelogs.com> <871v0hudzo.fsf@lifelogs.com> <87vcxsswox.fsf@lifelogs.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1304377223 5941 80.91.229.12 (2 May 2011 23:00:23 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 2 May 2011 23:00:23 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue May 03 01:00:18 2011 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 1QH26A-0001Mj-4l for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 03 May 2011 01:00:14 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:59296 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QH269-0006he-IO for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 02 May 2011 19:00:13 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:50424) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QH265-0006hN-OI for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 02 May 2011 19:00:10 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QH264-0005D8-BD for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 02 May 2011 19:00:09 -0400 Original-Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]:57165) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QH263-0005Cj-VK for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 02 May 2011 19:00:08 -0400 Original-Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QH263-0001IV-1F for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 03 May 2011 01:00:07 +0200 Original-Received: from cm-84.215.51.58.getinternet.no ([84.215.51.58]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 03 May 2011 01:00:07 +0200 Original-Received: from larsi by cm-84.215.51.58.getinternet.no with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 03 May 2011 01:00:07 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Mail-Followup-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-Lines: 12 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: cm-84.215.51.58.getinternet.no Face: iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAADAAAAAwBAMAAAClLOS0AAAAElBMVEUyIBa8tbSBdmYeDAti WD9JOyiSi0jtAAACWUlEQVQ4jU1Uy5LbIBAkwdwXJN8XLN9lE98lNNyJBf//K+kZKGcpl6s0Pc+e BqWUMm2couLnwN5azQNRfDT/Rba3SjgDaH6uLoQTeaif3PKW4eZdDQx094UB/FR7e1utdQAIOABA Umq3lj0HsCRacqvJz2afraNKpQOAiJJHCuMdAO+Kqont6R4sH2f4L+/+HEA34wDwlqQrSsHbzymd BkzZUvphtwcmyUwOR/wEbqqThgiiXUwdnmAY3AzAOQG+BChqVaZSEsAKPhuZH+yamipbQu/NwZEz aY4gnsIti+RS+JbiTDs7X6mHsKcAzDs3HEb1IrkKL5wWdg0gTwYxdVNN/+/XWy+ETaYeqC3t0lsi grT9ZegwrAVDTQDvvbQ1NzqKiKRWcXXeX/sgtLXCTWGPHHH1qJGxDh5dgRLUXoJdKlJ9n8+TAcoX DUoyqqMjfz7LsaNjfGdqQjtSXWM84vPcz6f9ZqAwUJdsp2e0+nF73H7xqmpmdlmHdn5FPz2+YvR2 iqvhfqErcOLi8ZhedknBAr0UXANwVfPu4vS4/Xb5fvdzjH9UB0CW4yT2ukFLTpuq0C7UUvNf19fr scigUbYwAEGnIR4RZYEc+gaXJAD4DZ4BEqAZtAV5B9k8YjYFsgovKi25Do1YF+48X5O7TLW1IXfc E+wcC4x9cugksDfMuqm3WgVgXcmtQo/YAu7BIRHoF3KhDBbiWmqBPjd5GXBRUKPoqKNZ26YuWZn+ ZMgVKhp5X+flXC/bAFY1HhCetR1IF9XJQOx2RLxE/nFdi0R83iHNseZj+gf337+63KnmYgAAAABJ RU5ErkJggg== Mail-Copies-To: never X-Now-Playing: Various's _The BYG Deal_: "Alpha Beta - Astral Abuse" User-Agent: Gnus/5.110018 (No Gnus v0.18) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:rL1MVbk4++XCzHPwWFHv8K6Cm/4= 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:139014 Archived-At: Ted Zlatanov writes: > Knowledge of the shared key is sufficient. Plus there is no > authorization granularity so the shared key grants full access. Am I > missing or misunderstanding something? Presumably you're not sharing the secret with anybody, so I think the mechanism is safe enough for what it's used for. -- (domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.) bloggy blog http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no/