incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Dennis E. Hamilton" <>
Subject RE: Code signing and WOT for releases
Date Wed, 27 Jul 2016 17:01:59 GMT

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Martin Gainty []
> Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2016 08:06
> To:
> Subject: RE: Code signing and WOT for releases
> > From:
> > To:
> > Subject: RE: Code signing and WOT for releases
> > Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2016 10:33:13 -0700
> > [ ... ] Yesterday, I received an email from one of the users who
> received a security advisory message that I signed.  The user's mail
> reader reported that the signature was untrusted (no surprise) and that
> the signature was BAD.  Since the mail reader shows the stripped
> message, and it looks perfectly fine, there is no way to help analyze
> that from my end.
> >
> > What I did do was (1) verify the message that was sent to me from the
> list and (2) verify the message in the list archive.  I then (3) advised
> the recipient what I did and also (4) how to find a public key
> certificate matching the ID in the signature and how to check that the
> private key is asserted to be in the possession of the person
> controlling and how the individual having control of
> that email address is associated with the ASF.
> MG>can we assume the key was converted to PKCS8 before asserting the
> key?
> for-use-with-opensaml
> MG>and then built new SignatureBuilder().buildObject() Signature with
> key locations before assigning
> assertion.setSignature(___)?
> examples/index.php?api=org.opensaml.xml.signature.Signature
> MG>/thanks dennis/

This signing had nothing to do with MIME-signatures or SSL.  It is a plaintext message that
has a "clearsign" OpenPGP signed section in-line in the message body.  (The signed part was
created first and then pasted into the plaintext email.)  You can see the archived form at
<> where
it is the only message there. At the bottom of the HTML-formatted display of the message,
select the "Unnamed text/plain" link to see a cleaner plaintext.  

This is not unlike the .asc files that can be made as external PGP signatures of code, except
it is inline instead of external to the file being signed.

> >
> > (I made another check of the archived message too.  The raw form of
> the message fails to verify when downloaded and that appears to be on
> account of some encoding features that have to be processed properly for
> the original text to be reconstituted properly. That might or might not
> be relevant to how that recipient's email reader handles PGP
> > signatures.)

(If you look at the raw version on the archive, you will see a pile of =20 line endings that
make the raw form unverifiable.  And because the signature block has a line ending in =, there
is an appended raw "3D" that breaks the whole thing. A client that does not restore the plaintext
before checking the signature will claim that the signature is "BAD".)

PS: I sent the same message to a colleague who has a PGP-aware email client, and the message
verified automatically and was presented without the boundaries and the signature block. 
Instead, there was a marker that indicated the part of the message that was signed.  So it
would appear that the person who reported to me encountered an interoperability failure.
> >
[ ... ]

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message