Re: A couple of questions and concerns about Emacs network security

[Lars Ingebrigtsen]

Jimmy Yuen Ho Wong <address@hidden> writes:

> I'll reply to the problem with setting gnutls-algorithm-priority to
> LEGACY in other email.

Well, I'm not really advocating that.  It's a bit too much hubris.  :-)
Nobody's perfect, and the default NORMAL gnutls-algorithm-priority is
fine by me, even if it means a less-than-perfect UI and user experience.

> That is correct, for consistency's sake. Since we'e decided on a
> default NORMAL:%DUMB_FW priority string, which means let the GnuTLS
> version you've built Emacs with to decide what cipher suites to allow,
> it follows that we should also default `gnutls-min-prime-bits` to nil,
> which also lets GnuTLS decide.

We could, but we know that we handle that bit well on our own in the
NSM, so I don't see the point.  

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
   bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no