[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Patch] Make tls.el support certificate verification
From: |
Elias Oltmanns |
Subject: |
Re: [Patch] Make tls.el support certificate verification |
Date: |
Fri, 16 Nov 2007 18:22:52 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.110007 (No Gnus v0.7) |
Hi Reiner,
Reiner Steib <address@hidden> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 08 2007, Elias Oltmanns wrote:
>
>> Simon Josefsson <address@hidden> wrote:
>>> Let's wait for copyright papers and then apply the patch in both
>>> CVS's.
>>
>> Papers have been signed and receipt has been acknowledged. Please
>> apply.
>
> Thanks.
>
>> Could someone please look at [1] and [2] as well? These patches are bug
>> fixes and recent bug reports wrt agentised servers (see [3]) seem to be
>> related.
>
> Could you please provide ChangeLog entries for these patches?
Well, I sent ChangeLog entries a week ago (see [1] and [2]) but nothing
has shown up in cvs yet. The same applies to my tls.el patch although
I'm probably to be blamed for that since I haven't provided a ChangeLog
entry for that one yet. So, here it goes:
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
* tls.el: Check certificates against trusted root certificates. Also,
provide an option to check if GNU TLS complained about a mismatch
between the hostname provided in the certificate and the name of the
host connnecting to. New (customizable) variables are: tls-checktrust,
tls-untrusted, tls-hostmismatch.
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
BTW: It has happened several times in the past that messages I sent to
the ding list went (seemingly) unnoticed. This is particularly annoying
if the message actually contains a ready made patch to fix a bug and all
I'm asking for is to review the patch and tell me what's wrong with it
so it can be committed eventually. Curiously enough, the message I
finally got a response to (the one that started this thread) was about
adding a new feature rather than fixing a bug in existing code. It also
strikes me that this message went to both, the ding list as well as
emacs-devel. This makes me wonder whether I should generally send
patches to the emacs-devel list rather than the ding list even if they
concern the gnus trunk. Or should I just Cc one of the Gnus developers
instead? In that case, is there a source where I can see who is
maintaining which part of Gnus?
Regards,
Elias
[1] <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/65609>
[2] <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/65611>
- Re: [Patch] Make tls.el support certificate verification, Elias Oltmanns, 2007/11/08
- Re: [Patch] Make tls.el support certificate verification, Reiner Steib, 2007/11/08
- Re: [Patch] Make tls.el support certificate verification,
Elias Oltmanns <=
- Re: [Patch] Make tls.el support certificate verification, Reiner Steib, 2007/11/16
- Re: [Patch] Make tls.el support certificate verification, Elias Oltmanns, 2007/11/16
- Re: [Patch] Make tls.el support certificate verification, Reiner Steib, 2007/11/24
- Re: [Patch] Make tls.el support certificate verification, Elias Oltmanns, 2007/11/24
- Re: [Patch] Make tls.el support certificate verification, Reiner Steib, 2007/11/25
- Re: [Patch] Make tls.el support certificate verification, Simon Josefsson, 2007/11/26
- Re: [Patch] Make tls.el support certificate verification, Elias Oltmanns, 2007/11/27
- Coding conventions (was: [Patch] Make tls.el support certificate verification), Reiner Steib, 2007/11/28
- Re: [Patch] Make tls.el support certificate verification, Reiner Steib, 2007/11/28