From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff Garzik Subject: Re: [git patches] libata updates, GPG signed (but see admin notes) Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2011 19:55:02 -0400 Message-ID: <4EAF3556.3000001@garzik.org> References: <20111026202235.GA20928@havoc.gtf.org> <1319969101.5215.20.camel@dabdike> <1320049150.8283.19.camel@dabdike> <7vy5w1ow90.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <4EAF1F40.3030907@zytor.com> <4EAF2245.90308@zytor.com> <7vzkggok6u.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" , Linus Torvalds , git@vger.kernel.org, James Bottomley , Andrew Morton , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, LKML To: Junio C Hamano X-From: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Nov 01 00:55:21 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: glk-linux-kernel-3@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RL1hJ-0004ui-24 for glk-linux-kernel-3@lo.gmane.org; Tue, 01 Nov 2011 00:55:21 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755562Ab1JaXzL (ORCPT ); Mon, 31 Oct 2011 19:55:11 -0400 Received: from mail-vx0-f174.google.com ([209.85.220.174]:37464 "EHLO mail-vx0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753209Ab1JaXzJ (ORCPT ); Mon, 31 Oct 2011 19:55:09 -0400 Received: by vcge1 with SMTP id e1so5300916vcg.19 for ; Mon, 31 Oct 2011 16:55:08 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=sender:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=TmbqT+qXQNVcYDwpRjNs4iE4CcdGYSGrJzBtNYJwFzU=; b=ub7ZYlGJRU7KNqKXY0P+haN3UMRLaU4cZQ3ftbvLlKTLOB7vd8ickkjlG/7Zs3Udy2 unov6eGNHiyzHujDAsTpgyOtaMAA6jwSgM4QG5uZ0Xpcc8LRXkYAFen6fgOiFXvlhwnA yKRRXg8OB8lW/IlqJOGWpQynWG37AbAx8njuE= Received: by 10.52.32.73 with SMTP id g9mr5856469vdi.125.1320105308328; Mon, 31 Oct 2011 16:55:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bd.yyz.us (99-43-178-25.lightspeed.rlghnc.sbcglobal.net. [99.43.178.25]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id gw4sm12131006vdb.10.2011.10.31.16.55.03 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 31 Oct 2011 16:55:04 -0700 (PDT) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:7.0) Gecko/20110927 Thunderbird/7.0 In-Reply-To: <7vzkggok6u.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On 10/31/2011 06:44 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > "H. Peter Anvin" writes: > >> On 10/31/2011 03:30 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: >>> >>> But if you do the normal "git pull git://git.kernel.org/name/of/repo" >>> - which is how things happen as a result of a pull request - you won't >>> get tags at all - you have to ask for them by name or use "--tags" to >>> get them all. >>> >> >> Didn't realize that... I guess I'm too used to named remotes. >> >> If so, just using a tag should be fine, no? > > So nobody is worried about this (quoting from my earlier message)? > > On the other hand, the consumers of "Linus kernel" may want to say that > they trust your tree and your tags because they can verify them with your > GPG signature, but also they can independently verify the lieutenants' > trees you pulled from are genuine. > > A signed emphemeral tag is usable as means to verify authenticity in a > hop-by-hop fashion, but that does not leave a permanent trail that can be > used for auditing. The main worry is Linus ($human_who_pulls) gets cryptographically-verified data at the time he pulls. Once Linus republishes his tree (git push), there will be few, if any, wanting to verify Jeff Garzik's signature. So no, I don't see that as a _driving_ need in the kernel's case. And IMO the kernel will be a mix of signed and unsigned content for a while, possibly forever. And Linus wrote: > [ Example gpg-signed small block that the attached patch adds to the > pull request: ] > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Commit be3fa9125e708348c7baf04ebe9507a72a9d1800 > from git.kernel.org/pub/git > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (GNU/Linux) > > iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJOrsILAAoJEHm+PkMAQRiGxZcH/31e0RrBitXUPKxHJajD58yh > SIEe/7i6E2RUSFva3KybEuFslcR8p8DYzDQTPLejStvnkO8v0lXu9s9R53tvjLMF > aaQXLOgrOC2RqvzP4F27O972h32YpLBkwIdWQGAhYcUOdKYDZ9RfgEgtdJwSYuL+ > oJ7TjLrtkcILaFmr9nYZC+0Fh7z+84R8kR53v0iBHJQOFfssuMjUWCoj9aEY12t+ > pywXuVk2FsuYvhniCAcyU6Y1K9aXaf6w5iOY2hx/ysXtUBnv92F7lcathxQkvgjO > fA7/TXEcummOv5KQFc9vckd5Z1gN2ync5jhfnmlT2uiobE6mNdCbOVlCOpsKQkU= > =l5PG > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- This is my preference for kernel pull requests at the moment. That has one advantage over Junio's "git pull --require-signature" and signed commits, notably, the URL is signed. But in general signed commits would be nice, too. pull-generated merge requests would need to be signed, potentially introducing an additional interactive step (GPG passphrase request) into an automated process. Jeff