Hi Greg, On 6/21/22 13:45, Greg KH wrote:
On Tue, Jun 21, 2022 at 01:34:01PM +0200, Alejandro Colomar wrote:Hi! On 6/21/22 13:16, Greg KH wrote:On Fri, Jun 17, 2022 at 08:12:12AM -0400, Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote:On Fri, Jun 17, 2022 at 02:00:16PM +0200, Fabian Stelzer wrote:Konstantin Ryabitsev has done some work in this area especially for kernel development by using email headers: https://people.kernel.org/monsieuricon/end-to-end-patch-attestation-with-patatt-and-b4 https://github.com/mricon/patattGreg refers specifically to patatt signatures. They aren't really specific to kernel development at all -- they can be used for any patches sent via mail. b4 (the tool used by many maintainers to retrieve patches from lists) will check patatt-style signatures (in addition to DKIM signatures) to help verify that the patches come from trusted sources and aren't someone pretending to be someone else.Yes, I was referring to patatt here, as linked by Konstantin's blog post above. It's part of the b4 tool (well, a git subproject in it), real link is at: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/utils/patatt/patatt.gitThank you all for the info. It works like charm (I still need to learn b4(1), but patatt(1) is enough for me right now). :)They are independent, patatt I use when sending patches, b4 I use when accepting patches. If you never have to accept patches, and read the mailing lists using the normal way, no need to use b4.
Oh, I do need to accept patches, for the man-pages :) But for now, the traffic isn't so high as to need to learn b4(1). But yes, I would like to learn a bit more about it to simplify some things. Cheers, Alex -- Alejandro Colomar <http://www.alejandro-colomar.es/>
Attachment:
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
