From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS54825 139.178.88.0/22 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.5 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 Received: from sv.mirrors.kernel.org (sv.mirrors.kernel.org [139.178.88.99]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8B88E1F44D for ; Sun, 24 Mar 2024 02:25:01 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: dcvr.yhbt.net; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=sasl header.b=Kwo7DY16; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from smtp.subspace.kernel.org (wormhole.subspace.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by sv.mirrors.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D5E39282406 for ; Sun, 24 Mar 2024 02:25:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B1CB257B; Sun, 24 Mar 2024 02:24:54 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="Kwo7DY16" Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com (pb-smtp20.pobox.com [173.228.157.52]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BE13681E for ; Sun, 24 Mar 2024 02:24:51 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=173.228.157.52 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1711247093; cv=none; b=m4aZS1Z9Z+iAeYomrHAkLICP3H5SlxZHm27t7HGvCaEbmgXRYgGpKHe4Kzw3IY/c7LKkMQwVH4jP9jgBu/5HlXfIVXEQNxSkmL8EBLs33hmoGu132QlF2BfNBn2z2URtHHLrCsHFymJGBXvPJfDgk4dQM/pmkWTvLWflwJG6vfM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1711247093; c=relaxed/simple; bh=wToSJCYDG5n9MDyn0iQ9cvtlrZaCGyHLrlgtB4QwUw4=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=VsWzy4FKXXOawkWTqDCqlfGufTjZgF2oLlw75+OBoLQGb1/qBsFk3QqocnAhRMYO43JtTFDnUMv9TMuumjsymayeEo7MsQx9qPAvGX5urHw8mHiNA68MBX45cYMdmvR6KQpw+T/OOdf5IkL9Hd/SUERcZgWAFsSrNF0h3i/3peY= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b=Kwo7DY16; arc=none smtp.client-ip=173.228.157.52 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3556A248A2; Sat, 23 Mar 2024 22:24:51 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=wToSJCYDG5n9MDyn0iQ9cvtlrZaCGyHLrlgtB4 QwUw4=; b=Kwo7DY16GJkxM6ugAlYNC8fcBN6jHQbT4DmOicnBTqV+1ZBXua1LBl nabm0E0KuGbsE71kP81koJ/FmblrNkMQ9DtDtbqknhxoy0r84RwkhahE84uO5S0l fmsDQuqy4uonBclzN00/FIXocXeifQ7L6owlOCxGJcVw1sI0o/nxg= Received: from pb-smtp20.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DB40248A1; Sat, 23 Mar 2024 22:24:51 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.125.139.61]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AD7B9248A0; Sat, 23 Mar 2024 22:24:47 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: "brian m. carlson" Cc: , Matthew John Cheetham , M Hickford Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/13] Support for arbitrary schemes in credentials In-Reply-To: <20240324011301.1553072-1-sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> (brian m. carlson's message of "Sun, 24 Mar 2024 01:12:48 +0000") References: <20240324011301.1553072-1-sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2024 19:24:46 -0700 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: AF5F91DC-E985-11EE-B811-F515D2CDFF5E-77302942!pb-smtp20.pobox.com "brian m. carlson" writes: > ... and because of this difficulty and the fact that NTLM uses cryptography > known to be insecure since 1995, there is often little interest in > implementing this support outside of libcurl. However, it would be > helpful if people who want to use it can still use it. This position was a bit surprising to me to come from you, but perhaps I am mixing up my recollection of your past work on this project with somebody else's? I somehow expected to hear something more like "if a less secure thing is cumbersome to implement, let it be, as that is better for the world". But I am OK to add less secure thing as long as it is an opt-in "easy way out". Everything else I read in the cover letter made sense to me. I just wanted to say that the above part was a bit surprising. Thanks.