Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.debian.maint.python > #16328

Re: Alternative signature mechanisms for upstream source verification

Path csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!bofh.it!news.nic.it!robomod
From Simon Josefsson <simon@josefsson.org>
Newsgroups linux.debian.devel, linux.debian.maint.python, linux.debian.maint.dpkg
Subject Re: Alternative signature mechanisms for upstream source verification
Date Sat, 05 Oct 2024 12:40:01 +0200
Message-ID <JuamB-h549-5@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References <Jswrf-g28h-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <JswUh-g2I4-11@gated-at.bofh.it> <JswUh-g2I4-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <JtvW9-gG49-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <JtyKl-gHL8-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <JtVdU-gVnJ-5@gated-at.bofh.it>
X-Original-To debian-devel@lists.debian.org
X-Mailbox-Line From debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org Sat Oct 5 10:37:33 2024
Old-Return-Path <simon@josefsson.org>
X-Amavis-Spam-Status No, score=-12.9 tagged_above=-10000 required=5.3 tests=[BAYES_00=-2, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, LDO_WHITELIST=-5, PGPSIGNATURE=-5, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
X-Policyd-Weight using cached result; rate:hard: -4.6
X-Greylist delayed 321 seconds by postgrey-1.36 at bendel; Sat, 05 Oct 2024 10:36:54 UTC
Openpgp id=B1D2BD1375BECB784CF4F8C4D73CF638C53C06BE; url=https://josefsson.org/key-20190320.txt
X-Hashcash 1:23:241005:debian-devel@lists.debian.org::m0KQFuGgjY5Myjwy:2whh
X-Hashcash 1:23:241005:debian-dpkg@lists.debian.org::l6//RlVJ3Erplvju:CkXA
X-Hashcash 1:23:241005:debian-python@lists.debian.org::32iDH0QiNpnz0FWF:WaIN
User-Agent Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version 1.0
Content-Type multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
X-Mailing-List <debian-devel@lists.debian.org> archive/latest/362003
List-ID <debian-devel.lists.debian.org>
List-URL <https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/>
List-Archive https://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/87ttdq3kgy.fsf@kaka.sjd.se
Approved robomod@news.nic.it
Lines 41
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway
Sender robomod@news.nic.it
X-Original-Cc debian-python@lists.debian.org, debian-dpkg@lists.debian.org
X-Original-Date Sat, 05 Oct 2024 12:36:13 +0200
X-Original-Message-ID <87ttdq3kgy.fsf@kaka.sjd.se>
X-Original-References <14198883.O9o76ZdvQC@galatea> <87bk04sslp.fsf@debian.org> <4017015.ElGaqSPkdT@galatea> <20241003152912.7wwrsuxezwg3kaoj@satie.tumbleweed.org.za> <c93cb2bd-ad10-439e-819b-0007bf60fadc@debian.org> <20241004182101.lnc5dqft4vurbcrh@satie.tumbleweed.org.za>
Xref csiph.com linux.debian.devel:113582 linux.debian.maint.python:16328 linux.debian.maint.dpkg:12690

Cross-posted to 3 groups.

Show key headers only | View raw


[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] - view raw

Stefano Rivera <stefanor@debian.org> writes:

> Should we expand this to include some of these new mechanisms?
> Things brought up in the debian-python thread include:
> 1. sigstore https://docs.sigstore.dev/
> 2. ssh signatures
> 3. signify https://man.openbsd.org/signify.1

+1

I believe all signatures we trust should be encoded in a non-mutable
transparency log like Sigstore/Sigsum etc.  But the first step towards
that is to add support for verifying that property.

> There is a general trend towards getting upstream sources from Git
> rather than tarballs in Debian, but we're a long way from moving across
> completely, or even finding consensus to do so.
> These signature mechanisms can generally be applied to git commits as
> well as tarballs.

Signatures of git commits is the same as a signature on a SHA1 object
which is broken for authentication purposes.  But it is possible to
discuss these issues separately, paving the way for git commit signing
to be trustworthy when GitHub/GitLab moves to SHA256.

/Simon

Back to linux.debian.maint.python | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

python devs are planning to stop signing with gpg Salvo Tomaselli <ltworf@debian.org> - 2024-09-30 23:50 +0200
  Re: python devs are planning to stop signing with gpg Salvo Tomaselli <ltworf@debian.org> - 2024-10-01 00:20 +0200
    Re: python devs are planning to stop signing with gpg Brian May <bam@debian.org> - 2024-10-01 02:00 +0200
    Re: python devs are planning to stop signing with gpg Stefano Rivera <stefanor@debian.org> - 2024-10-03 17:30 +0200
      Re: python devs are planning to stop signing with gpg Louis-Philippe Véronneau <pollo@debian.org> - 2024-10-03 20:30 +0200
        Re: python devs are planning to stop signing with gpg Jeremy Stanley <fungi@yuggoth.org> - 2024-10-03 22:30 +0200
        Alternative signature mechanisms for upstream source verification Stefano Rivera <stefanor@debian.org> - 2024-10-04 20:30 +0200
          Re: Alternative signature mechanisms for upstream source  verification Mathias Behrle <mbehrle@debian.org> - 2024-10-04 21:30 +0200
          Re: Alternative signature mechanisms for upstream source verification Guillem Jover <guillem@debian.org> - 2024-10-05 03:40 +0200
            Re: Alternative signature mechanisms for upstream source verification Stefano Rivera <stefanor@debian.org> - 2024-10-05 06:10 +0200
            Re: Alternative signature mechanisms for upstream source verification Martin <debacle@debian.org> - 2024-10-05 10:30 +0200
          Re: Alternative signature mechanisms for upstream source verification Simon Josefsson <simon@josefsson.org> - 2024-10-05 12:40 +0200
  Re: python devs are planning to stop signing with gpg Brian May <bam@debian.org> - 2024-10-01 00:30 +0200

csiph-web