Hi, Paolo Aglialoro wrote on Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 01:56:23PM +0100:
> Shouldn't in 2014 the aim having all working in utf-8? Most definitely not, that would directly run contrary to some of OpenBSD's most important project goals: Correctness, simplicity, security. While the article is old, the essence of what Schneier said here still stands, and it is not likely to fall in the future: https://www.schneier.com/crypto-gram-0007.html#9 In conclusion, Unicode can be used for any text where it is a safe assumption that the only thing ever to be done with it is "display it to the user", so the only risk would be "display slightly garbled text to the user". That's why mandoc(1) isn't very worried about handling Unicode characters in manual content. But Unicode must never be allowed near anything that might get executed as program code, including scripts in interpreted languages, including, but not limited to, the shell. In particular, that means trying to handle Unicode in filenames is a bad idea. System tools (like ls(1) and sh(1)) must never attempt to interpret input as Unicode for essentially the same reasons why they must never attempt to encode output in XML. Yours, Ingo
