[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#851774: [pkg-gnupg-maint] Bug#851774: Stop using apt-key add to add keys in generators/60local

Hi all--

On Sat 2017-02-04 18:25:52 -0500, Cyril Brulebois wrote:

> I'm adding gnupg maintainers in cc since they might have interesting
> tips for the implementation. Context: we need to replace apt-key add
> calls with dropping files under the appropriate names for extra
> repositories in a Debian Installer context.

Thanks for the Cc, KiBi.

I think that extra repositories should *not* have their keys added to
/etc/apt/trusted.gpg.d/*.gpg ("the fragment directory") by default,
since that authorizes the extra key to make valid signatures for the
main archive.

If the extra repo has its own key, it should be authorized to make
signatures only for the extra repo, and nothing else (similarly, the
official debian archive keys *shouldn't* be authorized to make
signatures for the extra repo).

So if we're talking about adding extra repositories for a debian stretch
installer, as i said over on #853858:

  for Debian 9 ("stretch") and later, you should place these keys (in
  binary form) someplace within /usr/local/share/keyrings/ and add a
  "Signed-By:" option to the relevant apt sources (see sources.list(5)).

Does that strategy sound right overall to the rest of you?

Regardless of the choice of filesystem location (fragment directory or
elsewhere), gpgv does want to see the curated keyrings it depends on in
binary format, so on to the next bit:

> so I think we need to have some kind of autodetection code. gnupg
> maintainers: is grepping for “BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK” enough to
> decide between armored and non-armored? Or do you have any better
> solutions?

If the keyring is non-armored, i assume that we're just going to try to
use it as-is, without transformation.  So the question is: which
incoming keys do we want to try to transform?

I'd err on the strict side and say that we really only want files that
contain nothing but a public key block.  That is, if there's any garbage
text before the ASCII-armored header, we probably want to reject the
file rather than trying to transform it.  This strictness avoids
tripping up in really bizarre corner cases (like if someone provides an
non-armored key that contains a notation, uid, uat, or other embedded
data that itself has the string "BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK" in it).  I
can cook up such a perversity if it would make anyone happy ;)

The strictness does mean that people who'd, say, copied and pasted an
entire e-mail message that includes a key and expected it to JustWork™
might be disappointed, but i might be OK with that.  Being clean about
what's in your repo keyrings is a habit we want to cultivate.

If you agree with being strict, then the following pipeline should
return 0 if the keyring is ASCII-armored:

    head -n1 | grep -Fxq -e '-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----'

If you want to be a little less strict and permit arbitrary whitespace
before the block, you could do:

    awk '/[^[:space:]]/{ print $0; exit }' | grep -Fxq -e '-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----'

I've tested and both of these pipelines appear to work with their
busybox variants using busybox 1:1.22.0-19+b1 on amd64.

So if you're OK with that test, then you need the transformation:

Over in #831409, i mentioned this simple pipeline to perform the actual

     awk '/^$/{ x = 1; } /^[^=-]/{ if (x) { print $0; } ; }' | base64 -d

Unfortunately, it looks to me like busybox doesn't offer a base64 applet
at the moment, which would otherwise allow d-i to do the de-armoring
entirely with busybox.  I could probably knock that applet together if
people want it -- it looks like busybox already has b64 subroutines in

Hope this helps!  I'm happy to follow up on it with you.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: