removing bdes..

[Slawa Olhovchenkov]

On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 11:01:32AM -0800, John-Mark Gurney wrote:

> > > > Ah, bdes utility, sorry.
> > > > But this is only 20K binary and 25K source and 80K documenation.
> > > > And need to update ed(1) (keep 80K documentation?)
> > > 
> > > See my other comment on lack of maintaining the utility...
> > 
> > Sorry, I am not understand you point ("someone marked it as insecure" -- right?).
> 
> Yes, but it took 15 years for someone to do that.. What other issues
> remain in the utility?

I am missing -- what issuse found in this utility?
Insecure algorithm? This is not issuse.

> > What need to maintaining in this utility?
> 
> I don't know, but that's the point...  Is the risk/cost of this utility
> more or less than the cost of having this utility...  Since I have a
> feeling that only a handful (none?) of people are currently using this
> utility, the risk/cost is higher than the benifit of having it...

What risk of having not suid, not network utility?

> > And what is insecure in this utility?
> > (As I understanding 'insecure' -- allowing to gain unauthorise access
> > or execute unapproved action)
> 
> gain unauthorized access is what is insecure...  Any data encrypted
> using this utility would put the data at risk of an unathorized party
> gaining access to said data (due to the use of an insecure crypto
> algorithm)...

Hmm, as I reminder FreeBSD motto is "tools, not policies".
If tools work as expected -- all OK.
Deny insecure crypto algorithm? Why don't force to use stong crypto
algorithm in all places (force disk, swap and memory encryption)?
Deny unencrypted network connection?
Deny unencrypted arhive?

> > > >      x       Prompt for an encryption key which is used in subsequent reads
> > > >              and writes.  If a newline alone is entered as the key, then
> > > >              encryption is turned off.  Otherwise, echoing is disabled while a
> > > >              key is read.  Encryption/decryption is done using the bdes(1)
> > > >              algorithm.
> > > 
> > > It turns out that ed has it's own implementation baked in, so removing
> > > bdes will not effect ed's functionality...
> > > 
> > > In my search, it looks like I'll take enigma along w/ bdes...
> > 
> > I am talk this not about utility bdes, I am talk about bdes.1 man page
> > and bdes.ps. I think not good reference to not-existing man page.
> > 
> > May be need to update ed.1?
> 
> We can simply remove the Xr if that really concerns you, but as the
> port would have the man page it isn't always not-existant...  I see
> some benefit to keeping it, though someone from the -docs team would
> speak up...