Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: Miroslav Rovis <miro.rovis@××××××××××××××.hr>
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] SHA-1 has just been broken
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2017 17:09:26
Message-Id: 20170228170529.GA18420@g0n.xdwgrp
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-user] SHA-1 has just been broken by Rich Freeman
1 On 170227-21:59-0500, Rich Freeman wrote:
2 > On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 8:10 PM, Miroslav Rovis
3 > <miro.rovis@××××××××××××××.hr> wrote:
4 > > Apologies for my not being able to reply sooner!
5 > >
6 > > On 170227-18:18+0300, Andrew Savchenko wrote:
7 > >
8 > >> > And via a new private big business, the Github. Giving over all users to
9 > >> > big Github brother.
10 > >>
11 > >> ???
12 > >> Github is entirely optional and is only for those who want to use it
13 > >> (we have both users and devs willing so), but in no way anyone
14 > >> demands its usage.
15 > > Yeah! Still, it would be great if git was used in distributed way, and
16 > > not from a central private business...
17 > >
18 >
19 > Git can pretty-much ONLY be used in a distributed way.
20 Correct, in that sense. But I didn't express clearly what I meant.
21
22 I really meant in this sense (invented quotations in this paragraph):
23 > Git was intended for everyone to run their own little git server and
24 > pull from each other. Git was NOT invented for centralized commercial
25 > social networking clouds such as github!
26
27 That was from:
28 https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Overlay:Youbroketheinternet
29
30 > In the sync
31 > workflow github is basically just a mirror. A lot of our mirrors are
32 > run by private businesses, and nobody knows what OS they're even
33 > hosted on, let alone whether the firmware and CPU microcode are FOSS
34 > along with their hard drive firmware.
35 I understand that. And I support any honess business. What I hate is
36 examples like Google, Oracle, Microsoft, IBM is a little more honest, I
37 think... The few at the control of those ruined so much in computing and
38 the internet.
39
40 GNU and FOSS, to lesser extent OSi, are good, even beautiful, socially
41 and philosophically.
42
43 > As far as distribution goes I think github is the wrong thing to worry
44 > about. What you want is traceable signatures from dev to user. Once
45 > you have that you can download from an NSA mirror and there shouldn't
46 > be any risk. All a mirror does is replicate data, and if
47 > modifications are detectable the worst they can do is a DoS.
48 I see.
49 > Most of the concerns that people tend to have with github is that you
50 > can become dependent on them for issue and pull request tracking and
51 > then if they decide to pull the plug you lose all that data. We try
52 > to minimize the use of these features and not make it a core part of
53 > the dev workflow.
54 Good practice!
55
56 > But, we do use pull requests and in theory we could
57 > lose those someday. The actual code itself gets pushed to the Gentoo
58 > infra Repo from a developer's box using plain old git after they've
59 > inspected/tested/etc it. So, there isn't really any way for Github to
60 > go injecting commits into the repositories we actually use. I guess
61 > they could do it for anybody using our github mirrors on the
62 > distribution side, but that's only because we don't have that all
63 > locked down and the same issue applies with any other mirror (rsync,
64 > etc). Again, you really need end-to-end signature checking to make
65 > any of these things truly safe.
66 Absolutely! I did figure that out since long!
67 > --
68 > Rich
69 >
70
71 And what I've spent some time doing today, is figuring out about the
72 info that I finally got from you people!
73
74 About time! My rattling was all about whether there was or wasn't a way
75 to do what is still in the title of that mail that I linked to, and gave
76 Message-ID of, to do this:
77
78 Is it safe to switch from webrsync to the git repo now?
79
80 And finally Andrew Shavchenko pointed me to gkeys !
81
82 Here's the answer to my query (ah, just the beginning of, my
83 implementation of it will take time):
84
85 emerge -tuDN app-crypt/gkeys app-crypt/gkeys-gen
86
87 # equery f gkeys-gen
88 ...
89 /usr/share/doc/gkeys-gen-0.2/README.md.bz2
90 ...
91
92 (
93 NOTE: The:
94 /usr/share/doc/gkeys-0.2/README.md.bz2
95 of the gkeys package is identical.
96 )
97
98 # bzcat /usr/share/doc/gkeys-gen-0.2/README.md.bz2
99
100 Gentoo Keys
101 -----------
102
103 ### About
104
105 Gentoo Keys is a Python based project that aims to manage the GPG keys used
106 for validation on users and Gentoo's infrastracutre servers. Gentoo Keys will be able
107 to verify GPG keys used for Gentoo's release media, such as installation CD's,
108 Live DVD's, packages and other GPG signed documents. It will also be used by
109 Gentoo infrastructure to achieve GPG signed git commits in the forthcoming git
110 migration of the main CVS tree.
111
112 ### License
113
114 Gentoo Keys is under GPL-2 License
115 #
116
117 But do I read this correctly?:
118
119 ...Gentoo Keys will be able
120 to verify GPG keys used for Gentoo's release media, such as installation CD's,
121 Live DVD's, packages and other GPG signed documents.
122
123 Again, about this (syntactical) object (in the sentence), with other
124 objects removed:
125
126 ...Gentoo Keys will be able
127 to verify GPG keys used for ...
128 ... packages...
129
130 Does that mean what I read? That with gkeys any user will be able to get
131 packages via git, and somehow automatically gpg -verify the signature of
132 each package that (s)he got when (s)he, say:
133
134 emerge -tuDN world
135
136 ?
137
138 Does that mean that?
139
140 And then, to achieve true verifiability in the open (machine connected
141 to online, and doing emerge'ing), you know what is still left to be
142 done? This:
143
144 Write TLS session keys to $SSLKEYLOGFILE #11614
145 https://github.com/rg3/youtube-dl/issues/11614#issuecomment-271064602
146
147 ( of course, apply that to git, just the way it has been, and that's so
148 beautiful to me, applied to wget, kudos to wget maintainer Giuseppe
149 Scrivano! IIRC his name )
150
151 There's no encryption on me, behind my back, in my machine that I can
152 allow and believe it's fine. No way. It must be allowed by me, asked of
153 me, and decryptable for me!
154
155 ( I decided to go without dbus in my life after this happened, behind my
156 back, with my Debian installation:
157
158 How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?
159 http://forums.debian.net/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=116770&start=45#p552566
160
161 PASTING, so readers get a feel about it:
162
163 $ ps aux | grep ssh
164 root 2184 0.0 0.0 54976 1004 ? Ss Sep06 0:00 /usr/sbin/sshd
165 mr 2447 0.0 0.0 10592 32 ? Ss Sep06 0:00 /usr/bin/ssh-agent /usr/bin/dbus-launch --exit-with-session x-session-manager
166 mr 15141 0.0 0.0 19980 1796 pts/9 S+ 21:48 0:00 grep ssh
167
168 PASTED.
169 )
170
171 But, I already spent on this more than I can if I am not to lose track
172 on other things that I'm now doing (related to virtualization). Will
173 have to leave this issue very soon now, else I'll have to go over from
174 scratch in that other work...
175
176 Thanks, Rich!
177
178 So, do I read those gkeys/gkeys-gen READMEs correctly?
179
180 Regards!
181
182 --
183 Miroslav Rovis
184 Zagreb, Croatia
185 https://www.CroatiaFidelis.hr

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-user] SHA-1 has just been broken "Taiidan@×××.com" <Taiidan@×××.com>
Re: [gentoo-user] SHA-1 has just been broken Andrew Savchenko <bircoph@g.o>