From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by arlo.cworth.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6DAD6DE024A for ; Sun, 22 Oct 2017 07:06:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at cworth.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.018 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.018 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.018] 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 fCq0BehdsJ0p for ; Sun, 22 Oct 2017 07:06:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from che.mayfirst.org (che.mayfirst.org [162.247.75.118]) by arlo.cworth.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20C7B6DE00D2 for ; Sun, 22 Oct 2017 07:06:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fifthhorseman.net (ool-6c3a0662.static.optonline.net [108.58.6.98]) by che.mayfirst.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8500AF99D; Sun, 22 Oct 2017 10:06:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: by fifthhorseman.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id B21FB2040E; Sat, 21 Oct 2017 18:21:48 -0400 (EDT) From: Daniel Kahn Gillmor To: Jani Nikula , Brian Sniffen , Matthew Lear , notmuch@notmuchmail.org Subject: Re: web interface to notmuch In-Reply-To: <87r2tww9tr.fsf@nikula.org> References: <87tvyvp4f2.fsf@istari.evenmere.org> <87376f13ho.fsf@fifthhorseman.net> <87r2tww9tr.fsf@nikula.org> Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2017 18:21:45 -0400 Message-ID: <87wp3ow39i.fsf@fifthhorseman.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2017 14:06:54 -0000 --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain On Sat 2017-10-21 23:00:00 +0300, Jani Nikula wrote: > For the list archive, we could restrict to displaying text/plain only. and text/x-diff, surely :) But yeah, good point. Brian, what do you think about such a constraint? would that make your implementation safe enough to put on the public Internet for a read-only archive? --dkg --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCgAdFiEEOCdgUepHf6PklTkyFJitxsGSMjcFAlnryHkACgkQFJitxsGS Mjfp8w/9F95CRMxpJG3Z5E0VM/e4QRsPi1FG/dtS9FsViNOogpCiSPxenMHbQOCz /jF8tBAdvzCYbK1UBT0yXc5GkYkdjm+aSlm0SPmo20CjQTzRcN6dzdYKWu6fr5uP qhS1p/tE0l0uT5/+D59p4OeW0Kw7NzUOqllBTB9KHLVM/4LNeD3R6EGo9fG/rmPB vGXIPJvXITp2d2TcZrIIBaGpynj2a3ZOt3wKoP6a7IaKRdkmHLzwvtFz7AgGk5h6 6+feDqHxqvmgPjxtikXDKZNiY41W/5lcAKrD3t3F4LIwF8t6dPNGRP0gCG2k5Iqs ds6tSod2bnP2KYONN0VxsCjvwKnpXNG2R0keof4WuDp/rV1gu15XZoZ8S4LkmmQR Ns1Fi8QoMNYEnm4gpg9eK08Gu17QtVU95DiJPB053nXQFDWOzpG1Ik9Cb6S2wdzb iyIk6KXb4G9RfOmlA7Q+L/jACiQ6UYFCVVyR472gMiy4ePrsQ3Kbt9xgyISMkeLp EXeonx56T6rgpjfhX3FBM3vUPag5W0KGzGsl77K/glVCHCaKG05quYaqrWhccC0T b8XTHs8s1eLhEIMu3dDs2c19MrWTEsL1uea+4UZaVvcf/VCf7nCONLYV7x0p9yts 9JL7CSGQKoHiGbm0ypMg5zTg5oHYphX1LCOXcYKGsbRoIQommSI= =nzvq -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--