Re: Libmailcheck- take two

On Sun, 28 Feb 1999, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:

> Ian Campbell wrote:
> >  
> > I hope we don't end up using fetchmail (well at least not for IMAP)... The
> > point with IMAP is that you don't d/l the mail from the server - it is
> > stored and manipulated on the server.
> I'm not saying we should use fetchmail to actually donwload the mail -
> I am suggesting that since fetchmail knows how to talk every mail protocol,
> for all practical purposes, it should be easier to modify it to check if 
> pending mail is avaialable (if it does not already provide this capability
> directly) than to implement this functionality for all those various mail 
> protocols.

Aaah, ok then... makes sense

> > 
> > I beleive there is .gnome_private directory analogous to .gnome except
> > only readable by the user.  there are gnome_config_private_* methods to
> > save stuff in there. Saving a password in here should be OK? I am guessing
> > that password saving is (part of) the reason these methods exist.  An
> > option to prompt is always nice mind you.
> No way. NFS home directories typically go over the network in the clear. 
> Also, crackers who crack root should not be able to use information on
> disk to infiltrate other hosts. Secret data should never ever be saved in the 
> user's home directory in the clear. Note that ssh encrypts your secret key 
> with a passphrase you must provide each time, for example, even though the 
> permissions on the .ssh directory do not in theory allow anyone to read it.

This sounds like quite a major problem with the whole .gnome_private idea.
(which is probably why I can't see any apps using it). Maybe someone
should look into encrypting this directory or something?


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]