Skip to content
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

meta: Release tags show as "Unverified" #76228

Open
camelid opened this issue Sep 2, 2020 · 9 comments
Open

meta: Release tags show as "Unverified" #76228

camelid opened this issue Sep 2, 2020 · 9 comments
Labels
A-meta Area: Issues & PRs about the rust-lang/rust repository itself C-bug Category: This is a bug. T-release Relevant to the release subteam, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.

Comments

@camelid
Copy link
Member

camelid commented Sep 2, 2020

See for example the tag for 1.46.0:

image

Is there any way to remedy that? Likewise, the Git CLI shows:

$ git tag -v 1.46.0
object 04488afe34512aa4c33566eb16d8c912a3ae04f9
type commit
tag 1.46.0
tagger Pietro Albini <pietro@pietroalbini.org> 1598541310 +0200

1.46.0 release
gpg: Signature made Thu Aug 27 08:15:27 2020 PDT
gpg:                using RSA key C13466B7E169A085188632165CB4A9347B3B09DC
gpg: Can't check signature: No public key

@rustbot modify labels: A-meta T-release C-bug

@rustbot rustbot added A-meta Area: Issues & PRs about the rust-lang/rust repository itself C-bug Category: This is a bug. T-release Relevant to the release subteam, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels Sep 2, 2020
@Mark-Simulacrum
Copy link
Member

I don't think so, because the release key is not associated with any particular GitHub user. I suppose @pietroalbini and I could upload it to our accounts, but that seems like a bad idea (it's not our key after all).

Realistically GitHub not having the public key doesn't really matter, the signing is targeted more towards local checking for very dedicated people.

@camelid
Copy link
Member Author

camelid commented Sep 2, 2020

Hmm, I wonder what other large projects do.

@camelid
Copy link
Member Author

camelid commented Sep 2, 2020

It looks like with Python the person releasing signs it with their personal key. Same with Node. Though I like Rust's model of signing it with the project's key. Is the release key the same as the key listed on the security policy page?

@Mark-Simulacrum
Copy link
Member

No, it's a different key. I don't know that we publish it ourselves anywhere, but it is on the OpenPGP key server, for example: https://keys.openpgp.org/search?q=108F66205EAEB0AAA8DD5E1C85AB96E6FA1BE5FE

We should probably publish the fingerprint somewhere at least.

@camelid
Copy link
Member Author

camelid commented Sep 2, 2020

Yeah, maybe on the website at the bottom of the page? I wonder why there isn't a way to associate a PGP key with an organization on GitHub...

@pietroalbini
Copy link
Member

I don't think so, because the release key is not associated with any particular GitHub user.

We could associate it to @rust-lang-owner, even though we'll also need to add rust-key@ as one of its verified email addresses.

@pietroalbini
Copy link
Member

The key is available at https://static.rust-lang.org/rust-key.gpg.ascii btw.

@jyn514 jyn514 added T-infra Relevant to the infrastructure team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. and removed T-infra Relevant to the infrastructure team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels Sep 2, 2020
@Manishearth
Copy link
Member

FWIW git and gpg will always claim the key as unverified until you fetch it locally

@camelid
Copy link
Member Author

camelid commented Sep 10, 2020

Since rustbot is now the one releasing, would it make sense to upload the release key fingerprint to rustbot's account?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
A-meta Area: Issues & PRs about the rust-lang/rust repository itself C-bug Category: This is a bug. T-release Relevant to the release subteam, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

6 participants