From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/14042 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: AUTHINFO Date: 15 Feb 1998 14:32:42 +0100 Sender: owner-ding@hpc.uh.edu Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035153298 12552 80.91.224.250 (20 Oct 2002 22:34:58 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 22:34:58 +0000 (UTC) Return-Path: Original-Received: from xemacs.org (xemacs.cs.uiuc.edu [128.174.252.16]) by altair.xemacs.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id FAA03181 for ; Sun, 15 Feb 1998 05:35:22 -0800 Original-Received: from sina.hpc.uh.edu (Sina.HPC.UH.EDU [129.7.3.5]) by xemacs.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id HAA19723 for ; Sun, 15 Feb 1998 07:33:56 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: from sina.hpc.uh.edu (lists@Sina.HPC.UH.EDU [129.7.3.5]) by sina.hpc.uh.edu (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id HAJ11977; Sun, 15 Feb 1998 07:33:32 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: by sina.hpc.uh.edu (TLB v0.09a (1.20 tibbs 1996/10/09 22:03:07)); Sun, 15 Feb 1998 07:31:59 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: from claymore.vcinet.com (claymore.vcinet.com [208.205.12.23]) by sina.hpc.uh.edu (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id HAA11917 for ; Sun, 15 Feb 1998 07:31:45 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: (qmail 25447 invoked by uid 504); 15 Feb 1998 13:31:40 -0000 Original-Received: (qmail 25439 invoked from network); 15 Feb 1998 13:31:38 -0000 Original-Received: from xyplex31.uio.no (HELO sparky.gnus.org) (129.240.154.51) by claymore.vcinet.com with SMTP; 15 Feb 1998 13:31:37 -0000 Original-Received: (from larsi@localhost) by sparky.gnus.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id OAA26642; Sun, 15 Feb 1998 14:35:10 +0100 Mail-Copies-To: never Original-To: ding@gnus.org In-Reply-To: Jason R Mastaler's message of "14 Feb 1998 16:30:52 -0700" X-Mailer: Quassia Gnus v0.27/Emacs 19.34 X-Face: &w!^oO~dS|}-P0~ge{$c!h\ writes: > Well, why not? It isn't likely, but not out of the question either. > Really, I don't see the reasoning behind using the same file for both > ftp remote login data and NNTP authentication data, especially when > both will be using the same syntax. I don't see any pros, but I do > see points of potential conflict (even if relatively minor). Well, the pros is that the user will only have to worry about one file containing sensitive information, and not two. > For example, people with FTP access to their newsserver who use this > Gnus option will inadvertently be losing the FTP session password > protection they once had. You mean, since the password is stored in clear text? But that's the case in any case. Or do you mean that miscreants will be able to sneak up to a logged-in terminal and ftp to the nntp server? I hadn't thought of that... I dunno. Let's have a vote: ~/.netrc or, uhm, ~/.authinforc as the default file? -- (domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.) larsi@gnus.org * Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen