autobuilding, pgp signing, security
Dale wrote :
> One way to keep the AutoBuild machines more secure, would be to put the
> archive, and its builder scripts on their own partition. The general rule
> would be that this partition is not mounted and not referenced in fstab or
> elsewhere. When the archive needs updating and build performed, the
> partition get's mounted by a "real" human being, who feels secure in the
> system (checked for breakins). After the builds get uploaded to master,
> the partition get's unmounted, and all is "secure" again.
a seperate partiotion is ok. it could also be a file mounted via loop
filesystem or a crypto filesystem (look at cfs).
> I agree that the machine should be given a pgp key, but an individual
> should be the party responsible for its invocation.
yes.
btw : why don't we let guy generate an official debian key, and
have every package signed by him and his scripts ? we talked about
signed packages a long time ago, and there is an implementation
somewhere, but it was never used. md5sums in package files, that are not
themself signed is not very secure, rpm had such a feature years ago,
and its one of the few rpm features i would like to see in debian.
what do you think ?
andreas
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org .
Trouble? e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
Reply to: