From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9AFBF3858C2F for ; Tue, 27 Sep 2022 21:01:44 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 9AFBF3858C2F Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=owlfolio.org Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owlfolio.org Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 602C35C006B; Tue, 27 Sep 2022 17:01:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imap45 ([10.202.2.95]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 27 Sep 2022 17:01:44 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=owlfolio.org; h= cc:cc:content-type:date:date:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:sender:subject :subject:to:to; s=fm1; t=1664312504; x=1664398904; bh=hk8cKWiF8p atLL9Zz0h6xeSNxxgpyMMc1w3WaT0HAYw=; b=RoHwoc3Y2BETPetDoqKdVxBCqE 2tW1ETG7WXWfhvrhsdY6fQ9wQ0ousXZHCdO46fypbCeCg1okBCQTBYClu0bINEaM Wkb6pC67TnY1imNxLiRdQXekKuFc5nH/BQ2/E8p8tukSYXVg98VIHHIOGQCnf8R+ bmXbH6eJ8+AfCrDeAV7jIgHbfw6DGA3g9k1c5RvbnmwOfKqvtEJ1EDI03GtIPbYn eORO8Q3kxpp6yyg8df/DVNyU+CHdWypHTHZfofVQxeNgP+25oWlNug7n9+7r4iHD ZrL46IQh0QfYSLNYS/ZLF8WHj8e8oa/JjvxzMtGU0S1qJAqw3n80+AYUSWKQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:date:date:feedback-id :feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id :mime-version:references:reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to :x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s= fm2; t=1664312504; x=1664398904; bh=hk8cKWiF8patLL9Zz0h6xeSNxxgp yMMc1w3WaT0HAYw=; b=eA53uyzHzFt5SNtXyCETdE1Y9t/27VAG+z3xwdoefShe FUQUm16rmifRly6DPRyAHyeeqGwDm0NJeLv19eAbvu8PdpcTnehFr+oedfoj1D8M byisYqO5WTwE+ITr/iMtI0lEPh/ASGPreaupnlTyRETu6rNkUNKt5+Lf1AF91Ge3 AL8E7upztLHfhD2fQyQ0nELzVaYnLMv/tU34YVSSi28xK5+eMoj7FNOHibJMfZXT R1PH+iZdtk1uJu8caQb94lVZ6b9Usl2xJMoMx4Mz3aZrQAnueIqRXYE5PbN8qgAt ym5GZ1pjMkNxauFo96z8whiCeHODH58SqsCuJS5HoA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvfedrfeegiedgudefvdcutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfgh necuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmd enucfjughrpefofgggkfgjfhffhffvvefutgesthdtredtreertdenucfhrhhomhepfdgk rggtkhcuhggvihhnsggvrhhgfdcuoeiirggtkhesohiflhhfohhlihhordhorhhgqeenuc ggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpefhleefheduhfelgeehgeejveehueeihedvgfeuueetteelieei teehfefhleduieenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfh hrohhmpeiirggtkhesohiflhhfohhlihhordhorhhg X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i876146a2:Fastmail Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id CCB84272007A; Tue, 27 Sep 2022 17:01:43 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.7.0-alpha0-968-g04df58079d-fm-20220921.001-g04df5807 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <132de00e-c809-40f1-9c14-437dff5fb18b@www.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: <180409CA-768D-44E5-A15D-91F66F8EC0C2@gentoo.org> References: <73ac38a2-c287-4cc1-4e9c-0f9766ac4c0c@gmail.com> <00d501d7ccbe$0169c340$043d49c0$@nexbridge.com> <63238.1635515736@cvs.openbsd.org> <6d8642e9-71f7-4a83-9791-880d04f67d17@www.fastmail.com> <180409CA-768D-44E5-A15D-91F66F8EC0C2@gentoo.org> Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2022 17:00:46 -0400 From: "Zack Weinberg" To: "GNU libc development" Cc: bjoern.esser@gmail.com, alx.manpages@gmail.com Subject: Re: readpassphrase(3) in glibc, and agetpass() (Was: Is getpass(3) really obsolete?) Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,JMQ_SPF_NEUTRAL,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: On Tue, Sep 27, 2022, at 4:30 PM, Sam James via Libc-alpha wrote: >On 27 Sep 2022, at 20:19, Alejandro Colomar via Libc-alpha wrote: >> I developed a function similar to getpass(3), but which allocates a buffer (similar to asprintf(3)). I only allocate once, and bail out if the password exceeds PASS_MAX, so no leaks in allocated memory (modulo bugs that I may have not noticed). ... >> Would you mind implementing readpassphrase(3) in glibc > I assume it'd be libxcrypt instead? My immediate reaction is that this is out of scope for libxcrypt. I could be persuaded otherwise but I don't have much time to work on *either* libxcrypt or libc right now so I won't be able to be very helpful in any event. I'm cc:ing Bjoern Esser in case he has an opinion. zw