Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: Paul Hartman <paul.hartman+gentoo@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Portage + checksums
Date: Tue, 06 Apr 2010 21:14:22
Message-Id: i2z58965d8a1004061413xff01aec8r4f99b1a7487c3d5b@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-user] Portage + checksums by Alan McKinnon
1 On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 3:41 PM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@×××××.com> wrote:
2 > On Tuesday 06 April 2010 20:56:30 Butterworth, John W. wrote:
3 >> Thanks.
4 >>
5 >> Do you know if someone makes a change to a copy of apache hosted on a
6 >> public mirror, will the sync between the servers determine that it's
7 >> corrupted (via 'bad' checksum) on the public side and replace it?
8 >
9 > I can answer this, I run a public Gentoo mirror (not an official one)
10 >
11 > If I, or some clown, loads a trojaned copy of Apache source code into
12 > my distfiles mirror, portage will complain bitterly because the hash in the
13 > manifest will fail. Then you will know something is wrong.
14 >
15 > If I trojan the ebuild and the portage tree to match my trojaned sources, you
16 > will probably not pick it up. This would be very risky indeed for me to do as
17 > I can't be sure you will sync the tree and get your distfiles from me.
18
19 Isn't there something like FEATURES="gpg" to enable checking gpg
20 signatures on ebuilds? (I haven't tried it so I don't know if this is
21 actually used)

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-user] Portage + checksums Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@×××××.com>