#189 security: use gpgv to verify CHECKSUM signatures
Merged by darknao. Opened by tmz.
fedora-web/ tmz/websites master  into  master

Download 189.patch

The gpgv command is designed to simply verify OpenPGP signatures. It
takes a keyring as an option and then any number of signed files and
verifies the signatures based on the keys in the given keyring.

Using gpgv allows the instructions to be simplified and avoids the
following confusing output from the currently recommended method:

gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature!
gpg:          There is no indication that the signature belongs to the owner.

The gpgv command expects the --keyring argument to be an un-armored
keyblock. This means dropping the ascii-armor from fedora.gpg (which is
more in line with the .gpg extension anyway). For users who still wish
to pull fedora.gpg and import it to their keyring, the un-armored
keyblock works just as well.

The updated instructions are:

$ curl -O https://getfedora.org/static/fedora.gpg
$ gpgv --keyring ./fedora.gpg *-CHECKSUM

The output from gpgv is:

$ gpgv --keyring ./fedora.gpg *-CHECKSUM
gpgv: Signature made Fri 19 Mar 2021 10:10:28 AM EDT
gpgv:                using RSA key 8C5BA6990BDB26E19F2A1A801161AE6945719A39
gpgv: Good signature from "Fedora (34) <fedora-34-primary@fedoraproject.org>"

Users no longer have to fiddle with marking the Fedora keys as trusted
in gpg nor do we have to explain why the large "WARNING" from gpg is
okay to ignore¹.

¹ https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/MPSGTW42RP4U75ZHUAHDMFIP6TTUW23Y/

Signed-off-by: Todd Zullinger tmz@pobox.com

I did not touch the old sites/getfedora.org/scripts/update-gpg-keys as I don't think it's used after 8f6ee1b (add f33 gpg key, auto-gen fedora.gpg, obsolete f30 key, 2020-09-30). If that's not correct, it's easy to fix.

@darknao, @thunderbirdtr Is this PR relevant anymore?

The instructions haven't changed, so IMO it's as relevant (or not) as it was when I filed it.

Looks good to me.
@tmz Can you do a rebase and fix conflicts?

rebased onto bbf03df29a72401601384d972701df91a4c01f12

Sure thing, done.

While testing, I noticed that the GPG key list has been more or less broken since February 2021. I'll file a separate PR (#255) to fix that issue (some minor tag breakage and typos in the DNS OpenPGPKey bits).

Thanks!

Pull-Request has been merged by darknao

Metadata