On Friday, September 5, 2025 at 8:09:05 AM UTC-5 Thomas wrote:

It seems to me that the display of an outline should be read-only, with a 
few interactive features like expanding nodes. That way the user doesn't 
need to learn anything special. Security aside, this brings in the tricky 
question about how to handle @other trees in a way that a user can 
understand without climbing a learning curve. Named sections don't present 
a problem, I think.  I'm also sure that sentinels should not be visible.  I 
don't know where that leaves Leo directives.


 This seems straightforward, and it would be tempting to charge ahead with 
coding.

Security might be a real concern.


 Unless I misunderstand the OP, security is the *only* concern. Otherwise, 
people could just install Leo or LeoJS.

Before discussing this topic further,  I recommend that Brian consult with 
management what would be acceptable. Unless then, our discussions lack 
direction. I don't envy anyone trying to keep a company's computers free 
from malware. I would clear any plan first.

OTOH, a Leo outline running in Leo could also be a security concern 


Absolutely! As I write this, I see that Leo should have an info item about 
security. The general rule is:

*    Be wary of receiving a .leo file from anyone you don't know and trust.*

Leo prevents any outline except myLeoSettings.leo from setting @bool 
scripting-at-script-nodes = True.
I thank Paul Patterson for pointing out the danger 
<https://groups.google.com/g/leo-editor/c/1saGMz5eplE/m/AwF5LXgbcskJ>.

But Leo can do nothing to prevent the unwary from foolishly clicking a 
button in an outline from an unknown source. In this sense, passing .leo 
files around should be a real security concern.

- it could modify a standard Leo command to do something nefarious. For 
myself, I use a javascript blocker in my browser. It would be best if the 
read-only representation of a Leo outline wouldn't need to import any 
script packages, for then a script blocker won't need to be told to make an 
exception, which once again could become a security matter.


I don't believe BitDefender would likely detect malicious .leo file. They 
would likely constitute a Day zero exploit 
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-day_vulnerability>.

*Summary*

Before exploring this topic further, I believe Brian should consult with 
his management to determine whether there are any acceptable use cases for 
using any form of Leo, including .html files.

Edward

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"leo-editor" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/leo-editor/e85caf93-9854-41dd-b237-29922c9d6c68n%40googlegroups.com.

Reply via email to