On Thu, 2008-09-04 at 23:12 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote: > Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: > > > >> NAK - if a fake public key were distributed then packages signed with > >> the fake key would be matched, allowing full access to install crap in > >> your machine. > >> > > > > True. > > > Actually I don't understand the paragraph above. It seems to be saying > that packages would be signed with a public key which can't be done. > So, the person making that statement needs to clarify. Which is the point I made earlier. > >> And packages signed with any valid redhat key would be > >> rejected. > >> > > > > Which is what I said. Thus it would be noticed immediately. > > > No, they would not be rejected as long as you still have Red Hat's > public key installed on your system. You can determine what public keys > are on your system by "rpm -qa gpg-pubkey*". > > When an rpm is signed it is signed with a private key and information > about the corresponding public key is placed in the rpm file. That > information is used to retrieve the correct public key for > verification. So, as long as you've not deleted it, they will verify. The hypothetical scenario being discussed is that you have already replaced the former (good but now possibly suspect) public key with a spurious new one. If that were to happen, you would be in danger of accepting trojanned packages signed with this new fake key. My point is that you would also *reject* packages signed with the new good key, and this would be noticed very quickly (basically the next time you did an update). poc -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
