<<< Date Index >>>     <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: Remove absolute paths from gpg.rc



Re: William Yardley 2007-03-17 <20070317010006.GG30068@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Yeah, but we're talking about the installed examples, not a hard-coded
> path that mutt will always use.

FYI, at least Debian uses that file to generate the gpg config.
(Basically by a grep -v ^#.) At the moment we are applying a patch to
remove the absolute path names there. If the shipped rc file drops
them, that's one patch less where the Debian Mutt is different from
"plain" Mutt.


Re: Dave 2007-03-18 <20070318084444.GJ5260@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> I'm sorry for taking so long to notice this thread.  (I was looking through an
> interesting thread from Gaëtan LEURENT, and noticed his comment about this
> thread, so I decided to read it, and got quite a laugh.  If you don't trust 
> your
> own $PATH, there's something fundamentally wrong with your environment.  If 
> you
> want extra $PATH security when running Mutt, there's nothing stopping you from
> wrapping Mutt with a $PATH sanitizer.  The UNIX philosophy isn't to protect a
> user from himself any more than the user himself decides to protect himself 
> from
> himself.
[...]

Thanks Dave. That's exactly what I was trying to say.

Christoph
-- 
cb@xxxxxxxx | http://www.df7cb.de/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature