[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       lyx-devel
Subject:    Re: Alternative to individual embedding?
From:       Andre Poenitz <andre.poenitz () mathematik ! tu-chemnitz ! de>
Date:       2008-05-18 18:06:54
Message-ID: 20080518180654.GA4977 () tu-chemnitz ! de
[Download RAW message or body]

On Sun, May 11, 2008 at 12:24:03PM -0400, rgheck wrote:
> rgheck wrote:
>>> 4. The switching between bundle and unbundled mode is non-reversible.
>>> For example, when ../figures/figure.png is copied to
>>> filename.lyxdir/figures/figure.png during bundling, it is not copied
>>> back during unbundling. That is to say, if you work in unbundled mode
>>> locally, send your document in bundled mode to your co-author, you can
>>> not get your external files back when the document is sent back. In
>>> another word, you have to use bundled mode if you intent to share your
>>> file with others.
>>>
>>>   
>> This discussion would also involve the words "session-based alternative".
>>
> And I should have added: I thought we had agreed that we will not implement 
> any form of reversibility. It's what leads to the really bad security 
> problems. So if Bo's latest implementation permits reversibility, then it 
> has the same sorts of security problems the old one did. It might be a 
> little harder to exploit them, I don't know, but they will still be there 
> waiting for someone with enough malicious imagination to cause problems.

Does it?

From my point of view all the problems _I_ envisioned seemed to be
solved with the anonymization/encryption approach.

Andre'

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]