I would certainly welcome a patch on that for gnutls! On November 4, 2018 5:37:32 AM UTC, Yoshimasa Niwa <niw at niw.at> wrote: >> Hm... or maybe only the 'password' type fields should be stored in >> keychain and every other form field can be provided on the command >> line? Those ones aren't secret, after all. > >Yeah, I agree. Keychain should only fill the password type field. > >> We do still need to allow for the fact that there might be multiple >> passwords though (and one day, maybe some saveable and some not, for >> example a password and a separate OTP). But specifying on the command >> line which password(s) to save would be OK, I think? > >Yes, that's why I mentioned in previous email asking user to save it >or not in Keychain, >but giving it as an argument would be better option. >I knew it because for my personal usage, the form requires two >passwords and >one is for OTP as exactly what you described. >Let me change a little bit more on my patch. > >> FWIW what I'd *really* like to see is SSL certificate support using >the >> keychain... > >Looks like GnuTLS has common API that is for supporting system key >store, however, >according to their documents, it?s at this moment only supporting >Windows one. >I think it may be not much difficult to use Keychain to lookup >certificates and keys >like what current `ANDROID_KEYSTORE` does. >Let me try after implementing above changes for passwords. > >Y > >-- >Yoshimasa Niwa > >_______________________________________________ >openconnect-devel mailing list >openconnect-devel at lists.infradead.org >http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/openconnect-devel -- Sent from my mobile. Please excuse my brevity.
