GNU bug report logs - #66245
[PATCH] ; Silence macOS 14 warning

Previous Next

Package: emacs;

Reported by: Eshel Yaron <me <at> eshelyaron.com>

Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2023 19:02:02 UTC

Severity: normal

Tags: patch

Merged with 66269

Found in version 29.1.50

Fixed in version 29.2

Done: Stefan Kangas <stefankangas <at> gmail.com>

Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.

Full log


Message #8 received at 66245 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Alan Third <alan <at> idiocy.org>
To: Eshel Yaron <me <at> eshelyaron.com>
Cc: 66245 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#66245: [PATCH] ; Silence macOS 14 warning
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2023 11:35:29 +0100
On Wed, Sep 27, 2023 at 09:00:45PM +0200, Eshel Yaron via Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors wrote:
> Tags: patch
> 
> Hi,
> 
> After updating to macOS 14 (and rebuilding Emacs), I see the following
> warning whenever I start Emacs:
> 
>     WARNING: Secure coding is not enabled for restorable state! Enable secure coding by implementing NSApplicationDelegate.applicationSupportsSecureRestorableState: and returning YES.
> 
> This patch does exactly what the warning suggests, and it silences the
> warning.
> 
> TBH I'm not entirely sure I understand the implications of implementing
> `applicationSupportsSecureRestorableState`.  IIUC it makes Emacs opt-in
> to the "secure state restoration" mechanism in contrast to a former
> (supposedly less secure) mechanism, but AFAICT Emacs doesn't opt-in to
> state restoration in the NS port in the first place...

A description of what this fixes is here:

    https://sector7.computest.nl/post/2022-08-process-injection-breaking-all-macos-security-layers-with-a-single-vulnerability/

I'm not sure if making this change will affect us, as I don't think we
support saved states, although I could be wrong.

Is it possible for you to try a before and after test of how Emacs
handles saving the state over a reboot? That is, have a running Emacs
with open files and reboot, tick the "reopen windows when logging back
in" option, and see if it behaves differently with this patch applied
and not applied?

If it doesn't then I think this is probably safe and won't affect us,
so we should apply it. Otherwise we'll need to examine what's changed
and see if we can work around it.

Thanks!
-- 
Alan Third




This bug report was last modified 1 year and 231 days ago.

Previous Next


GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.