Re: [Galeon-devel] Galeon 2 usability

* Ricardo Fernández Pascual <[email protected]> [021013 17:46]:
>         - mime handling: galeon has a small separate mime database which
>         is easier to edit and works well for galeon.
>         It remembers previous user choices and fallbacks to gnome-vfs
>         when possible.
>         Also, some people think that users should be able to choose the
>         helper used by galeon without affecting the gnome-vfs mime
>         database.
>         
>         The disadvantages of using only gnome-vfs would be:
>         
>         1) Global effect of changing a default helper
>         2) Fact that you have to go out the gnome-vfs control panel to
>         change them.
>         3) Useless defaults in the database.
>         
>         This would be implemented using a dialog with "Save", "Cancel"
>         and "Open". "Open" will use gnome vfs to choose the helper

Have anyone actually considered the security-implications of this subject?

Surely, the gnome-vfs settings for helper applications must be strictly
separated from the settings for galeon, otherwise we're set for the same
security nightmare we're making fun of Windows for!

The applications I'd like to use for my "safe" content on my hard drive
or network drives are completely different from the ones I'd like to use
for the content I find at random untrusted places on the web!

I may want to invoke gs on a postscript-file on my hard drive, but I certainly
would not like to invoke gs without -dSAFER on any file found on the
Internet.  I may even enable a bash-helper for text/x-bash files on my
hard drive, but doing the same for Internet content would be a disaster!

Are people actively trying to make the same mistakes as Microsoft here?



Eivind