|
View:
New views
8 Messages
—
Rating Filter:
Alert me
|
|
|
Packages built with unchecked dependenciesHello,
some time ago, I noticed that using the default pbuilder setup I was not checking signatures on build-dep packages when building my debian uploads [1] [2] [3]. I thought this was bad, and since then I pay attention to it. Now that I have LVM in my laptop and use schroot, I take care of building the chroots using "debootstrap --keyring=..." [4], which means that when I download build-deps inside the chroots, the build-deps get checked. Then I tried sbuild to build using my schroot setup, and found that by default it disables signature checking. So I stopped using sbuild until I find a way to reenable it. Then I had a look at some random buildd log[5]: WARNING: The following packages cannot be authenticated! x11-common libice6 libsm6 libxau6 libxdmcp6 libxcb1 libxcb-xlib0 libx11-data libx11-6 libxt6 apt-utils bsdmainutils groff-base libnewt0.52 libpopt0 man-db whiptail libmagic1 file gettext-base libidn11 html2text gettext intltool-debian po-debconf debhelper cdbs cmake defoma dh-buildinfo [...] Authentication warning overridden. [...] and found that not even our buildds check signatures, and since I understand that they don't always reside on the same network as the main ftp archive, nor they connect to it using some sort of VPN (correct me if I'm wrong), I worry that this means that they also buld packages using untrusted build-deps. Am I the only one that feels very, very uncomfortable about this? Ciao, Enrico [1] http://www.enricozini.org/2006/tips/trusted-pbuilder.html [2] http://wiki.debian.org/SecurePbuilder [3] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=317998 [4] http://www.enricozini.org/2008/tips/joys-of-schroot.html [5] http://buildd.debian.org/fetch.cgi?&pkg=libept&ver=0.5.21&arch=i386&stamp=1216774836&file=log -- GPG key: 1024D/797EBFAB 2000-12-05 Enrico Zini <enrico@...> |
|
|
Re: Packages built with unchecked dependenciesEnrico Zini wrote:
> Then I tried sbuild to build using my schroot setup, and found that by > default it disables signature checking. So I stopped using sbuild until > I find a way to reenable it. > [...] > and found that not even our buildds check signatures, and since I > understand that they don't always reside on the same network as the main > ftp archive, nor they connect to it using some sort of VPN (correct me > if I'm wrong), I worry that this means that they also buld packages > using untrusted build-deps. > > Am I the only one that feels very, very uncomfortable about this? > Yes. Errr... I mean... No! It also makes me uncomfortable too. If there is some good reason, I don't know what it is. Even if the network path was completely trusted, I can't think why signature checking should be disabled. Anyway, I am lazy ;-). How did you reconfigure sbuild to enable signature checking? (On the topic of schroot and sbuild, I found this references useful; it is getting dated now but some parts are still relevant: <http://www.pseudorandom.co.uk/2007/sbuild/> if only it mentioned what this "apt-get-update" program/script is) Thanks. Brian May -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@... with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@... |
|
|
Re: Packages built with unchecked dependenciesEnrico Zini wrote:
> Hello, > Hi,Hhi > > Am I the only one that feels very, very uncomfortable about this? Nope: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.debian.devel.general/121242 > > > Ciao, > > Enrico > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@... with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@... |
|
|
Re: Packages built with unchecked dependenciesOn Thu, 24 Jul 2008, Enrico Zini wrote:
> and found that not even our buildds check signatures The reason they do this is that they build from incoming (queue/accepted). And incoming is not signed. I asked Ryan and Joerg if that could be changed a few weeks ago and they said they'd look into it. Joerg mentioned something about doing it during debcamp. Cheers, weasel -- | .''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** Peter Palfrader | : :' : The universal http://www.palfrader.org/ | `. `' Operating System | `- http://www.debian.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@... with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@... |
|
|
Re: Packages built with unchecked dependenciesOn Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 09:49:00AM +1000, Brian May wrote:
>> Am I the only one that feels very, very uncomfortable about this? > Yes. Errr... I mean... No! It also makes me uncomfortable too. If there > is some good reason, I don't know what it is. Even if the network path > was completely trusted, I can't think why signature checking should be > disabled. This is mentioned in the thread that Raphael Geisser points to in the other message: basically, the buildds skip signature checking because they also need to get packages from incoming, which are not in a signed repository. I'm following up to this in a reply to Raphael, though. > Anyway, I am lazy ;-). How did you reconfigure sbuild to enable > signature checking? It seems that you can't, in my version of sbuild, unless you patch the code. The code responsible for disabling signature checking is in /usr/share/perl5/Sbuild/Chroot.pm and it does not seem to allow any sort of customisation: sub _setup_options (\$\$) { [...] if (defined($info) && defined($info->{'Location'}) && -d $info->{'Location'}) { [...] my $aptconf = "/var/lib/sbuild/apt.conf"; [...] # Always write out apt.conf, because it may become outdated. if (my $F = new File::Temp( TEMPLATE => "$aptconf.XXXXXX", DIR => $self->get('Location'), UNLINK => 0) ) { print $F "APT::Get::AllowUnauthenticated true;\n"; print $F "APT::Install-Recommends false;\n"; if (! rename $F->filename, $chroot_aptconf) { die "Can't rename $F->filename to $chroot_aptconf: $!\n"; } } } else { die $self->get('Chroot ID') . " chroot does not exist\n"; } } > (On the topic of schroot and sbuild, I found this references useful; it > is getting dated now but some parts are still relevant: > <http://www.pseudorandom.co.uk/2007/sbuild/> > if only it mentioned what this "apt-get-update" program/script is) You can actually ignore that if you run something like this before you start doing your builds of the day: schroot -c sid-source -- sh -c "apt-get update; apt-get dist-upgrade; apt-get autoclean; apt-get clean" Ciao, Enrico -- GPG key: 1024D/797EBFAB 2000-12-05 Enrico Zini <enrico@...> |
|
|
Re: Packages built with unchecked dependenciesOn Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 10:57:40AM +0200, Peter Palfrader wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Jul 2008, Enrico Zini wrote: > > and found that not even our buildds check signatures > The reason they do this is that they build from incoming > (queue/accepted). And incoming is not signed. I asked Ryan and Joerg > if that could be changed a few weeks ago and they said they'd look into > it. Joerg mentioned something about doing it during debcamp. Oh thanks, lovely. I'm glad to hear something's moving: I feel a bit better now. Ciao, Enrico -- GPG key: 1024D/797EBFAB 2000-12-05 Enrico Zini <enrico@...> |
|
|
Re: Packages built with unchecked dependenciesOn Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 10:08:57AM +0100, Enrico Zini wrote:
> It seems that you can't, in my version of sbuild, unless you patch the > code. ...and if you want to patch the code, you can actually do it using the patch that I've just prepared and sent at http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=492327 Ciao, Enrico -- GPG key: 1024D/797EBFAB 2000-12-05 Enrico Zini <enrico@...> |
|
|
Re: Packages built with unchecked dependenciesOn Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 09:19:24AM +0100, Enrico Zini wrote:
> Then I tried sbuild to build using my schroot setup, and found that by > default it disables signature checking. So I stopped using sbuild until > I find a way to reenable it. Just to follow up: - sbuild initially copied what the buildds were doing, and it also made sense back when signature checking was new and it broke things, but not any more. - over the weekend, I rewrote sbuild-createchroot to work better with debootstrap, and this includes using --keyring by default so that signature checking will be enabled by default in the chroot. - I also applied Enrico's patch which simply makes signature checking optional, rather than hard-coding it to be disabled, as it was previously. This is now in git, and it will be uploaded in the next few days. Any testing would be appreciated. Thanks, Roger -- .''`. Roger Leigh : :' : Debian GNU/Linux http://people.debian.org/~rleigh/ `. `' Printing on GNU/Linux? http://gutenprint.sourceforge.net/ `- GPG Public Key: 0x25BFB848 Please GPG sign your mail. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@... with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@... |
| Free Forum Powered by Nabble | Forum Help |