[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#13551: acknowledged by developer (control message for bug #13551)
From: |
Richard Stallman |
Subject: |
bug#13551: acknowledged by developer (control message for bug #13551) |
Date: |
Sat, 05 Oct 2019 09:18:38 -0400 |
[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]
> Emacs cannot possibly know that when you send to "arthur", that that
> email will eventually end up going to "arthur@gnu.org".
Sure it can. It could get the domain from mail-host-address. We
could also create another variable specifically to control this.
The current behavior, as you described it, is not much better
security. It is unpredictable in practice for the user. However,
I am not sure how much security issue there is in sending A a message
encrypted for B. Nobody can decrypt that message.
I have seen reason to think that the current behavior doesn't match
what you described. I entered "To: rms" and encrypted the message.
It recognized that was me, rms@gnu.org, and encrypted with my key.
It did this even though my key does not list 'rms' with no host name as
an address (as far as I can tell).
gpg --edit-key rms@gnu.org gave me this:
pub 4096R/2C6464AF2A8E4C02 created: 2013-07-20 expires: never
usage: SC
...
sub ...
[ultimate] (1). Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
If the key had another address, wouldn't it be listed there?
In addition, after I run the encryption command,
plain 'rms' has been edited into 'rms@gnu.org'. How does it know
to make that change?
--
Dr Richard Stallman
Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://gnu.org, https://fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)
[Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread] |
- bug#13551: acknowledged by developer (control message for bug #13551),
Richard Stallman <=