From: "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@zx2c4.com>
To: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
Cc: workflows@vger.kernel.org,
Konstantin Ryabitsev <konstantin@linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: Patch attestation RFC + proof of concept
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 21:30:35 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAHmME9pLHMM=Bkw2Kd4wk7Q=rboBRvnNVaC8fBE9yCm2VJZwMA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMuHMdXiVO8Lkg-qk1VQmp8opfoOXfurgkaqQcA5DdK78RBWow@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 6:05 PM Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote:
> How would the commit base help here? It would indicate this is an old
> patch, which would be indicated by the signature date, too.
For email, not much, since the patch is always disconnected. The point
is that this isn't a problem when verifying commits inside of git
itself because the signatures are over the commit's position in the
tree, so you can't reorder or rearrange commits. Not necessarily an
applicable solution here, but worth noting that other setups don't
encounter the same problem due to other, larger, design decisions.
> The only thing that would help is time-limiting the window between
> attestation and application.
Sure, one can draw up a few bandaids for this, such as: big red text
saying "warning, this commit is kind of old", which of course means
its date needs to be included in the metadata signature, and accurate
too. Maybe there are other bandaids. Or this is just a fundamental
issue with disconnected by-email patches that we'll have to live with.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-02-27 13:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-02-26 17:25 Patch attestation RFC + proof of concept Konstantin Ryabitsev
2020-02-26 17:50 ` Kees Cook
2020-02-26 18:47 ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
2020-02-26 20:11 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2020-02-26 20:42 ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
2020-02-26 21:04 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2020-02-26 21:18 ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
2020-02-27 1:23 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2020-02-27 4:11 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2020-02-27 10:05 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2020-02-27 13:30 ` Jason A. Donenfeld [this message]
2020-02-27 14:29 ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
2020-02-28 1:57 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2020-02-28 2:30 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2020-02-28 18:33 ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
2020-02-28 17:54 ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
2020-03-06 16:53 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CAHmME9pLHMM=Bkw2Kd4wk7Q=rboBRvnNVaC8fBE9yCm2VJZwMA@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=jason@zx2c4.com \
--cc=geert@linux-m68k.org \
--cc=konstantin@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=workflows@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).