Re: Intention to tighten RPM crypto-policy back

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

 



On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 7:47 PM Kevin Fenzi <kevin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 11:19:18AM +0200, Alexander Sosedkin wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > 6 months ago, there's been a F38 blocker: https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2960
> > Long story short:
> > RPM has moved to sequoia,
> > sequoia has started respecting crypto-policies,
> > Google repos have been signed with a 1024-bit DSA key,
> > Google Chrome was not installable => F38 blocker.
> > Back at the time, it's been hastily "resolved"
> > by relaxing RPM security through crypto-policies
> > just enough to tolerate that Google signature:
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2170878
> > https://gitlab.com/redhat-crypto/fedora-crypto-policies/-/merge_requests/129
> >
> > Since then it has been brought to my attention that
> > Google has now added a 4096 bit RSA key
> > https://www.google.com/linuxrepositories/
> > (EB4C 1BFD 4F04 2F6D DDCC EC91 7721 F63B D38B 4796)
> >
> > Because of that, I'd like to revert that RPM policy relaxation
> > https://gitlab.com/redhat-crypto/fedora-crypto-policies/-/commit/a12f7b20638be8f872ad1995c7d2edce41c227b5
> > in (f39) rawhide and align RPM security with the rest of the policy.
> >
> > Thoughts / feedback?
>
> It might be good to go through all the ones that were hit by this (it
> wasn't just chrome) and indicate if they are now fixed.
> You can see a partial list in the common bug:
>
> https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/popular-third-party-rpms-fail-to-install-update-remove-due-to-security-policies-verification/70498
>
> and in the discussion off it.

Whoa, that's too many, I suspect misreporting.
I seriously doubt they were all really using DSA-1024 and switched over.
But if that really was the case --- great job to all of them.

> The list from there:
>     Google Chrome (RPM signature rejected, repo key rejected)
Repo has added RSA-4096, RPM is signed with SHA-512, installs

>     Microsoft Edge (repo key rejected)
RSA-2048, RPM is signed with SHA-256, installs

>     Dropbox (repo key rejected)
RSA-2048, RPM is signed with SHA-512

>     Skype (repo key rejected)
RSA-2048 / SHA-512

>     Visual Studio Code (repo key rejected)
RSA-2048 / SHA-256 (let's name a package `code`. outstanding move)

>     Sublime Text (repo key rejected)
RSA-4096 / SHA-256

>     Microsoft Teams (repo key rejected)
RSA-2048, but https://packages.microsoft.com/yumrepos/ms-teams/repodata
looks barren

>     TeamViewer (repo key rejected)
RSA-4096 / SHA-256
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux