Gentoo Archives: gentoo-project

From: "Aaron W. Swenson" <titanofold@g.o>
To: gentoo-project@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Preparations Council meeting 2011-08-09
Date: Mon, 01 Aug 2011 22:58:14
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-project] Preparations Council meeting 2011-08-09 by Patrick Lauer
Hash: SHA256

On 08/01/2011 05:51 PM, Patrick Lauer wrote:
> On 07/29/11 19:55, Fabian Groffen wrote: >> With a bit more than a week ahead of us for the next council >> meeting, I'd like to start preparing the agenda, given that current >> practice still is to send it out a week in advance. > > A small thing which I've brought up for discussion twice (and both > times it was mostly ignored), but which I'd really like to see > discussed or even agreed on: > > A simple policy making signed commits mandatory, plus a simple policy > on key length, permissible encryption/signature algorithms, and a > well-defined place where (public) keys are made available for > verifying and checking the validity of the signatures. > > > It would greatly improve the current status quo and remove any > ambiguity which might motivate people to use a 4-bit key for signing > to be within the letter of the law. > > > Thanks, > > Patrick >
I second this. The Developer's Handbook specifies[1] that a DSA key with a minimum 1024 bit length is required, but not whether 'DSA and Elgamal' or 'DSA (sign only)' should be used, and it does not specify to which key server the key must be submitted. Inquiring minds need to know. - - Aaron [1] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - iF4EAREIAAYFAk43L1MACgkQCOhwUhu5AEkRIQD9EEn6+lXi5CHmqxLh0ltCQY41 w9Kh+Ck2KOnH+QDPUvMA/2gL13ROr6fZDgyufKrS6yCA4LFxkigs2d0hAkw9V6ce =Tm3U -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----