From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <dkg@fifthhorseman.net>
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by arlo.cworth.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E26F66DE178F
 for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Fri, 15 Jan 2016 11:12:00 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at cworth.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.025
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.025 tagged_above=-999 required=5
 tests=[AWL=-0.025] autolearn=disabled
Received: from arlo.cworth.org ([127.0.0.1])
 by localhost (arlo.cworth.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
 with ESMTP id RpBJSWAXJMlN for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>;
 Fri, 15 Jan 2016 11:11:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from che.mayfirst.org (che.mayfirst.org [209.234.253.108])
 by arlo.cworth.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4551D6DE0A87
 for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Fri, 15 Jan 2016 11:11:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from fifthhorseman.net (unknown [38.109.115.130])
 by che.mayfirst.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D0D00F984;
 Fri, 15 Jan 2016 14:11:55 -0500 (EST)
Received: by fifthhorseman.net (Postfix, from userid 1000)
 id 474F72002F; Fri, 15 Jan 2016 11:11:55 -0800 (PST)
From: Daniel Kahn Gillmor <dkg@fifthhorseman.net>
To: Tomi Ollila <tomi.ollila@iki.fi>, David Bremner <david@tethera.net>,
 Notmuch Mail <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/9] add a gpg_path value for notmuch_database_t
In-Reply-To: <m21taqbnt8.fsf@guru.guru-group.fi>
References: <1449718786-28000-1-git-send-email-dkg@fifthhorseman.net>
 <1449718786-28000-8-git-send-email-dkg@fifthhorseman.net>
 <m21tas7ifa.fsf@guru.guru-group.fi> <87mvtgfws4.fsf@alice.fifthhorseman.net>
 <87d1ubdu0k.fsf@zancas.localnet> <m24mfmbolm.fsf@guru.guru-group.fi>
 <m21taqbnt8.fsf@guru.guru-group.fi>
User-Agent: Notmuch/0.21+66~g8c19a9a (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/24.5.1
 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2016 14:11:55 -0500
Message-ID: <871t9i7j44.fsf@alice.fifthhorseman.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system."
 <notmuch.notmuchmail.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://notmuchmail.org/mailman/options/notmuch>,
 <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch/>
List-Post: <mailto:notmuch@notmuchmail.org>
List-Help: <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch>,
 <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2016 19:12:01 -0000

On Sun 2015-12-13 06:17:07 -0500, Tomi Ollila wrote:
> Actually now that I sent this mail it kept rolling on my mind... If anyone
> else than me (and libgpgme?) thinks that '.' should not be in search path
> we could do

fwiw, i agree that . should *not* be in the search path.

> if (getenv("PATH") == NULL) {
>    path_set = true;
>    setenv("PATH", "/bin:/usr/bin", 1); // XXX *BSD configurability //
> }
> else path_set = false;
>
> ... g_find_program_in_path("gpg2")
> ... g_find_program_in_path("gpg")
>
> if (path_set) {
>   unsetenv("PATH");

I'm game for something like this, but i've got a queue of patches i'm
about to send that would provide a different place to make this change,
so i'm not making it now.  please keep this in mind, though :)

> I also thought of examining the return value starting with ./ but
> (current or) future version of g_find_program_in_path() might
> canonicalize the returned path...

i'm not sure what this suggestion means -- do you mean checking to see
whether the returned value started with ./ ?  If so, I agree that this
seems like a not very robust way to protect against this problem.

Should we maybe also be reporting this as a bug against
g_find_program_in_path ?

                       --dkg