Re: Package signing: database signatures?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]



On 05.03.2012 10:39, Christian Hesse wrote:
> Hello everybody,
> 
> afaik, database files in official repositories are not signed yet. Are they?
> 
> This forces one to set SigLevel to 'Optional' instead of 'Required'. Now if
> anybody wants to provide an infected package he/she only needs to provide no
> signature at all and the package is happily accepted, no?
> 
> So when will database files from official packages be signed?
> 
> And even more interesting: Does it make sense to add a new option
> 'PkgRequired'? This could force valid signatures for packages and make it
> optional for database files.

You should read pacman.conf(5) "PACKAGE AND DATABASE SIGNATURE CHECKING"
and use "Optional PackageRequired"

-- 
Florian Pritz

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Wireless]     [Linux Kernel]     [ATH6KL]     [Linux Bluetooth]     [Linux Netdev]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]
  Powered by Linux