Duncan <
[email protected]> writes:
Sam James posted on Wed, 29 May 2024 19:37:47 +0100 as excerpted:
# Sam James <[email protected]> (2024-05-29)
# OpenPGP key of malicious xz co-maintainer. This key is no longer used
# by any ebuilds in tree. Removal on 2024-06-29.
# Bug #928134.
sec-keys/openpgp-keys-jiatan
I'd suggest adding the xzutils GLSA and/or version mask and removal commit tags so people unfamiliar with the story coming across this in the git history say five years from now can easily see that Gentoo took the proper actions with appropriate timing.
I can mention the GLSA explicitly, I suppose, but people can read the
bug anyway.
I did try to be verbose in the various commits for this (which you can
see on the bug) already.
Also, might not hurt to make that "malicious xz upstream former co- maintainer" or some such, making even clearer that it wasn't gentoo-level package-maintainer, and that they *ARE* former.
But yes, a fair point on mentioning it was an upstream co-maintainer
instead. I'll change that later.
Finally, could we update security practices (maybe it's already in-
process?) to ensure the bad key is masked and removed earlier, along with the bad packages/package-versions? I've no explanation how it could
happen without a (n entirely theoretical, AFAIK) gentoo-level accomplice outing themselves, but it would sure look bad if some how, some way, something (even in an overlay) inexplicably started using such a key again while it was still in-tree. Maybe even provide an expedited security exception of some sort from normal tree-cleaning procedures for the sec-
keys category?
As I explained in the commit message(s), I deliberately didn't remove
5.4.6 prematurely - although it was masked the whole time, and remains
so - because I didn't want to contribute to confusion about what is, and
isn't, known to be bad. I also explained this in the bug as we went.
I don't really think anything using the key would be meaningful at
all, given how verify-sig works. It's primarily a tool for ebuild
maintainers to ease verification of signatures. It doesn't lend
something extra legitimacy.
Also, the keyring package has been masked the whole time -- now I'm just *last-riting* it. So, sure, I guess I could have, but then I would've
been removing verify-sig from 5.4.6 for theatre and it didn't feel like
a great use of time when there was real work to be doing.
--=-=-Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iOUEARYKAI0WIQQlpruI3Zt2TGtVQcJzhAn1IN+RkAUCZliEN18UgAAAAAAuAChp c3N1ZXItZnByQG5vdGF0aW9ucy5vcGVucGdwLmZpZnRoaG9yc2VtYW4ubmV0MjVB NkJCODhERDlCNzY0QzZCNTU0MUMyNzM4NDA5RjUyMERGOTE5MA8cc2FtQGdlbnRv by5vcmcACgkQc4QJ9SDfkZCKugEAn6THkYXNm1vEeF4j3dX9EPw5VqXB5X8chcWF lpeFT3AA/RX2SNmg9mLN1ccVjNdrC9jEbT/EYDd3uFNlnIHLfMcN
=hi7c
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)