From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 55685C3F2CD for ; Wed, 4 Mar 2020 11:47:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A68321741 for ; Wed, 4 Mar 2020 11:47:30 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=dyntopia-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.i=@dyntopia-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.b="QUZIBKpq" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729333AbgCDLr3 (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Mar 2020 06:47:29 -0500 Received: from mail-pj1-f66.google.com ([209.85.216.66]:54526 "EHLO mail-pj1-f66.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1729273AbgCDLr3 (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Mar 2020 06:47:29 -0500 Received: by mail-pj1-f66.google.com with SMTP id np16so234375pjb.4 for ; Wed, 04 Mar 2020 03:47:28 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=dyntopia-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :mime-version; bh=WDOJTQK5ck+8r4Zf3ZsVQV/latrxaL9EkVDF982sj4E=; b=QUZIBKpq3nhgHY5PYB0LaCGR6VtaEb64C0Tj0m8ekISplWW4yNLqab3tLyQSujBxkX 7Igz/VeRrq4qeeArf8ewqGlQX306v54/kralHZDd4UMOTuO2BTKQdNY+ZeEXtAu/GNWe uAaP4RxnOrzDXsXOjHzBge2fuxR+NBJNlFTpHImHfoS3xLvTgJYBwlbsslnaYstq0R/u QW/A1vnGYK/73FbSawWUxmVvbDPJzp1rAWflgNMyyEWDxOk8FSMhitGr7S00z6widHy9 eLisF9VfLGt9oiQe6XggOkGk8lfsxN42PUGDXl4cmosn3qJuP41xh2QOWfrTiZelT3cH zwGw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:mime-version; bh=WDOJTQK5ck+8r4Zf3ZsVQV/latrxaL9EkVDF982sj4E=; b=fGSWjfj4c7OFokic5zyWfVCVeKOrnqF4XiP7jNZAeaRJXDT4PMKyePfb7jgg2+KW48 mgdebOIPWuozxBFZdjrG/PDwKuIC78Avf2W2GxYPaecd7DVTDCYezpCfME3p/tQhsZPc faE6eBzw46bpvZTVdt9Zor0H/If4e2upn6EKq6OswbqkBupAZGDHeI1JO52Qsteukc46 nFVxCRda/8lbvP8hrYP51ANMu3Pwj6E+MOx5upJBB15kNr3qQOXnupyZEMn9fUdVcM/9 brpvzurFpH7uNAK2kvfdQaIQzDXO2sXZQLZaB3eOxuB7UYWc/kfGZuHL5aq+N3U8kCxP c/zg== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ09hicGf8O1Dw4QC2HFLiqjj0ELuH1sXUgtSg7bgkiWbh9PAlBq 1AHwNwK6KeRoWQ3z/B5ahQVIG59U7uQ= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vtDUwOd2tC7oMvmi2Y3/iQrR5cqFa4525K1WxGcF0gE6QNPv5gBocDpPe3MnRyUp83zhdVNOw== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:8bc8:: with SMTP id r8mr2681576plo.48.1583322447842; Wed, 04 Mar 2020 03:47:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([203.144.74.196]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d22sm2658843pja.14.2020.03.04.03.47.26 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 04 Mar 2020 03:47:27 -0800 (PST) From: Hans Jerry Illikainen To: Junio C Hamano , "brian m. carlson" Cc: Linus Torvalds , Git List Mailing Subject: Re: Signed commit regression? In-Reply-To: References: Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2020 11:33:55 +0000 Message-ID: <87zhcwxskc.hji@dyntopia.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Feb 28 2020, Junio C Hamano wrote: > I'd expect that there may be another round of attempt to update the > GPG interface. Let's make sure we won't lose info given to the > end-users while doing so. The regression was introduced by this botched chunk in 72b006f4bf: @@ -521,18 +522,19 @@ static int show_one_mergetag(struct commit *commit, gpg_message_offset = verify_message.len; payload_size = parse_signature(extra->value, extra->len); status = -1; if (extra->len > payload_size) { /* could have a good signature */ - if (!verify_signed_buffer(extra->value, payload_size, - extra->value + payload_size, - extra->len - payload_size, - &verify_message, NULL)) + if (!check_signature(extra->value, payload_size, + extra->value + payload_size, + extra->len - payload_size, &sigc)) { + strbuf_addstr(&verify_message, sigc.gpg_output); + signature_check_clear(&sigc); status = 0; /* good */ - else if (verify_message.len <= gpg_message_offset) + } else if (verify_message.len <= gpg_message_offset) strbuf_addstr(&verify_message, "No signature\n"); /* otherwise we couldn't verify, which is shown as bad */ } There are two ridiculous bugs in my original patch: 1. The output from GPG is only added to `verify_message' if a signature verifies successfully. 2. On verification failure, the "No signature" message is always added to `verify_message'. This is because, again, no output from GPG is added to `verify_message' on failure, so its length will always equal `gpg_message_offset' (see the initial assignment) when `check_signature()' returns non-zero, sigh... Not sure of the proper way of fixing a reverted commit, but I'll send v1 based on pu that includes regression tests. I'm sorry for my fuckup and the headache it caused! -- hji