Re: trusted vs untrusted packages

[Diyab <diyab@diyab.net>]

James Morris wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Oct 2003, Russell Coker wrote:
> 
> 
>>Now this raises some interesting issues.  If a signed package has a program 
>>which relies on some other program (and has a dependency), what happens if 
>>the dependency is satisfied by an unsigned package?  Installing the unsigned 
>>package may not result in the system being fully functional (execution of the 
>>file in question may be denied).
> 
> 
> This should be like enforcing vs. non-enforcing -- you either want all of
> your packages signed (and the above would fail) or not (just generate a
> warning).
> 
> 
> - James

How about trust based on the package requiring said untrusted or 
temporarily untrusted package.  For example, you have package abc signed 
by a trusted source.  The package contents have been verified as 
legitimate through something like the package signature. A requirement 
made by the verified abc package says you need package xyz.  The abc 
package also gives you the option to install a public key for the 
required xyz package, which is trusted by the abc package.  Therefore as 
long as package xyz passes the basic signature/validity check then not 
only are the contents valid but they are trusted by someone you trust.

Timothy,

-- 
I put instant coffee in a microwave and almost went back in time.
		-- Steven Wright


--
This message was distributed to subscribers of the selinux mailing list.
If you no longer wish to subscribe, send mail to majordomo@tycho.nsa.gov with
the words "unsubscribe selinux" without quotes as the message.