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

Re: Meeting Minutes, FTPMaster meeting March 2011


>> - The long standing project of enabling autosigning for the buildds also
>>   got finished. That means that packages successfully built can now be
>>   uploaded automatically, without waiting for the buildd admin to wake
>>   up/come back from holiday/whatever. The rules for this are simple
>>    * the buildd host must be maintained by DSA and have restricted
>> access
>>    * the key must have a size of 4096 or higher and the private part
>>      must never leave the buildd
>>    * the key expires within 120 days
>>    * there are not more than 2 keys per buildd (so they can do a key
>>      rollover)
>>    * no network access during build time/for the build part
>>   We maintain a set of keyrings, one per architecture, together with a
>>   shell script which allows the wanna-build admins to add and remove
>>   keys as necessary.
> So, AIUI, only members of the wbadm GID can change keys, not any random
> buildd admin.


> If I'm supposed to be maintaining a buildd host, I should be able to
> update the key allowed for signing, or I can't do my job properly. We've
> had a situation where only a limited group of people could activate
> buildd machines in the past, and it was broken; I have no desire to get
> back to that situation.

You can do your job properly and you can activate buildd machines. What
you can
not get is an added feature on top slightly easing the workload. I don't
this can seriously be called "unable to do the job properly".

Now, this feature does require a whole set of people to do work before
(for example DSA to have the machine DSA maintained and secured up, getting
the ssh keys and w-b access for the buildd, getting access to incoming to
stuff from there), and so I really fail to see where "When asking for
ssh/incoming/w-b access, get them to prepare the autosign key" is much of
added trouble?

> Please fix this by doing one of
> - Adding me (and other buildd admins) to the wbadm group,

None of ftpteams call.

> - Creating a new GID to which all buildd admins are added (I'd suggest
>   'builddadm' for that, but apparently that's already taken and is 100%
>   the same as wbadm; if that isn't used, however, it could make sense)
>   which would limit who can update keys

Also none of ftpteams call, we dont change other peoples groups.

> - Changing the GID to "Debian", rather than anything else (I don't think
>   you lose much by doing that, but I guess there might be reasons not
>   to, and it's not my call anyway)

Now this won't happen.

> - Finding someone else to maintain praetorius and voltaire

Not my call either, even though I do think that putting it onto this single
feature is a bit over the top.

Basically this is something the people on the buildd site have to fight out
between. What we on the ftp side want is a *limited* set of people who can do
keychanges, that isn't changing too often. wbadm does seem to be a perfect
for this.

> For clarity, the last option is *not* my preference. However, if none of
> the other three are done, I'm no longer interested in spending my time
> doing something I can't do properly anyway. I've been forced to work
> around not being able to fix issues with connectivity between my buildd
> host and the rest of the Debian infrastructure in the past, and I won't
> stand for it anymore.

See above. This is an *additional* thing, any buildd will be able to run even
without this (and someone mentioned you don't like this feature anyways?),
and so you can do your work as properly as you have been able until now,
so suddenly going this high up seems a bit heavy to me. (Especially since
serious buildd does need more other bits added and allowed before)

Anyways, as written above, this is mainly an issue for a team I have
nothing in,
deal with them. What ftpmaster wants to have we have stated. How we want
the keys
submitted is a technical issue already dealt with too, so the rest seems to
be a social issue that should be solveable in whatever way.

bye Joerg

Reply to: