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

Re: Validating tarballs against git repositories



There are many important and useful things here, but I want to address
this one point:

On 2024-03-30 00:29, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Antonio Russo <antonio.e.russo@gmail.com> writes:
> 
>> If that's the case, could make those files at packaging time, analogous
>> to the DFSG-exclude stripping process?
> 
> If I have followed this all correctly, I believe that in this case the
> exploit is not in a build artifact.  It's in a very opaque source artifact
> that is different in the release tarball from the Git archive.  Assuming
> that I have that right, stripping build artifacts wouldn't have done
> anything about this exploit, but comparing Git and release tarballs would
> have.
> 
> I think you're here anticipating a *different* exploit that would be
> carried in build artifacts that Debian didn't remove and reconstruct, and
> that we want to remove those from our upstream source archives in order to
> ensure that we can't accidentally do that.

In this case, as Guillem walks through in a later email, build-to-host.m4
would be generated by autotools under different circumstances (not Debian
today, because of differences in versions).

I therefore consider that file a build artifact, perhaps incorrectly given
Simone's comment that autoreconf cannot be used to reliably re-bootstrap all
of these files.

I was (before Simone's point) arguing to ALWAYS re-bootstrap it all, or at
least always rebootstrap on a Debian machine.  A prerequisite to this, more
generally then, is that we can always rebootstrap from auditable source.

I appreciate that, unless that binary process happens reproducibly, that
just shifts the trustee to a different person, and doesn't actually address
this kind of carefully-orchestrated attack. I also appreciate the Ken
Thompson "trusting trust" nightmare scenario makes the compiler another
major issue.

What I'm hoping for is more limited: assume our existing infrastructure is
sound, but develop hygiene and tooling that prevents accepting binary and
build-artifact Trojans into Debian.

Best,
Antonio

Attachment: OpenPGP_0xB01C53D5DED4A4EE.asc
Description: OpenPGP public key

Attachment: OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Reply to: