On 01/22/2010 04:24 PM, Przemek Klosowski wrote: > On 01/22/2010 07:53 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: >> On 01/22/2010 01:22 PM, Tomas Mraz wrote: > >>> These are checksums required by FIPS-140-2 integrity verification checks >>> of the fipscheck and ssh binaries. >> >> I.e. package data. >> >> => These packages are non-FHS compliant and qualify as broken. > > I don't believe so---it's not my line of business but I understand that I do ... and as a member of the FPC, I do have a strong opinion on this. > - in some circumstances (government, regulated companies) encryption > must be certified to the FIPS 140-2 standard I don't know this "standard". > - on Linux encryption (https, ssh) is handled by OpenSSL, which went > through the FIPS certification process > > - one of the conditions of FIPS certification is a capability for > run-time consistency checks, hence the fipscheck package > > - the fipscheck package checks against the checksums stored in the > .XXX.hmac files, therefore those files are required if a system needs > to be FIPS-compliant. > > Having said that, I don't understand how does this scheme prevent > someone from subverting the executable and creating a matching .hmac > file, so that the fipscheck fails to see the problem. May-be this "fips standard" collides with the FHS, may-be this standard is defective? Do you have a pointer/reference to this "standard"? Does it really mandate pollution /usr/bin and thus $PATH? > I expect it's > handled properly but I don't know how. According to the FHS, such files belong somewhere below /usr/share, /usr/lib, /var or even /etc - /usr/bin is reserved for executables. Package data, package metadata etc. belongs outside of /usr/bin etc. Ralf -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
