-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 85
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
PGP signatures for packaging #231
Comments
would Matt Heon's signature be better? He is the one that signs podman. |
It's not so much about the "who" but more about the "how" in this case. Establishing a chain of trust basically enables outsiders to verify that you "trust" the given other person to do releases as well and outsiders may then use those respective keys to verify their signed tags. |
@dvzrv understood. let us rap about this as a team this week. |
Getting everyone on the team authorized to do a release together and doing mutual signatures on our keys seems like a perfectly doable thing that should resolve this, so long as we can figure out how to actually distribute the keys once this is done; I remember that we had a second developer do a Podman release to ensure I wasn't the only one capable of doing so, and that was rather a mess as I was able to sign her key, but not to actually upload the signed version anywhere. I don't think PGP key distribution has improved much since then, unfortunately. Maybe we should just publish the public keys of everyone with release authority in a repo under the containers/ org? Though then we run into security concerns if that repo were to be compromised... |
Providing a separate repository with relevant PGP public keys (and their signatures) could work. |
Gentle bump on whether there has been any progress on this :) |
Hi! I'm about to package netavark for Arch Linux. This is more of a general inquiry about how this project will handle PGP signatures for tags and/or release artifacts.
As a short background info: We are able to use PGP signed source tarballs or PGP signed tags for building a given upstream. This is all assuming that a chain of trust between releases is maintained by upstreams though.
Currently it seems that @baude is using
74FE091D25519980B2D84447160386BECB6F0643
to sign the tags of this project and has therefore started a chain of trust (of length 1 :) ):At the time of writing I was not yet able to find the PGP key anywhere else but here on github via the developer's profile page (probably because it is still very new).
Given that a bus factor == 1 on releases is never a good idea and that we have seen issues with the chain of trust with quite a few projects in the past, I would like to hereby ask about your stance on the topic for this project.
Are you able to ensure, that
Answering the above will help us a great deal in assessing whether we can rely on the PGP signed tags or not. Thank you! :)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: