Your message dated Sat, 24 Oct 2015 23:24:40 -0400
with message-id
<CANTw=MMXj+38rntduh57p8C5HgT=mAbTq=gMs008O==-gr9...@mail.gmail.com>
and subject line Re: [Pkg-chromium-maint] Bug#763408: chromium: does not
display ECC certificate algorithms
has caused the Debian Bug report #763408,
regarding chromium: does not display ECC certificate algorithms
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact [email protected]
immediately.)
--
763408: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=763408
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact [email protected] with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: chromium
Version: 37.0.2062.120-2
Severity: minor
Chromium ships with ECC certificates[0], but when viewing the
Certificate Signature Algorithm or Subject Public Key Algorithm fields,
they are displayed as OIDs. Presumably Chromium knows how to handle
these algorithms to perform cryptographic operations, so it should be
also able to display the algorithms in an appropriate human-readable
form. The user would probably be interested to know that the more
secure SHA-384 hash algorithm is used here instead of, say, SHA-1.
Please consider adding this type of human-readable output.
[0] For example, the COMODO ECC Certificate Authority
-- System Information:
Debian Release: jessie/sid
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'stable'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Foreign Architectures: i386
Kernel: Linux 3.17-rc5-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
Versions of packages chromium depends on:
ii chromium-inspector 37.0.2062.120-2
ii gconf-service 3.2.6-3
ii libasound2 1.0.28-1
ii libc6 2.19-11
ii libcairo2 1.12.16-5
ii libcap2 1:2.24-6
ii libcups2 1.7.5-2
ii libdbus-1-3 1.8.8-1
ii libexpat1 2.1.0-6
ii libfontconfig1 2.11.0-6.1
ii libfreetype6 2.5.2-2
ii libgcc1 1:4.9.1-15
ii libgconf-2-4 3.2.6-3
ii libgdk-pixbuf2.0-0 2.30.8-1
ii libglib2.0-0 2.42.0-1
ii libgnome-keyring0 3.12.0-1
ii libgtk2.0-0 2.24.24-1
ii libharfbuzz0b 0.9.35-1
ii libjpeg8 8d1-1
ii libnspr4 2:4.10.7-1
ii libnss3 2:3.17.1-1
ii libpango-1.0-0 1.36.7-1
ii libpangocairo-1.0-0 1.36.7-1
ii libspeechd2 0.8-6
ii libspeex1 1.2~rc1.2-1
ii libstdc++6 4.9.1-15
ii libudev1 215-5
ii libx11-6 2:1.6.2-3
ii libxcomposite1 1:0.4.4-1
ii libxcursor1 1:1.1.14-1
ii libxdamage1 1:1.1.4-2
ii libxext6 2:1.3.2-1
ii libxfixes3 1:5.0.1-2
ii libxi6 2:1.7.4-1
ii libxml2 2.9.1+dfsg1-4
ii libxrandr2 2:1.4.2-1
ii libxrender1 1:0.9.8-1
ii libxslt1.1 1.1.28-2
ii libxss1 1:1.2.2-1
ii libxtst6 2:1.2.2-1
ii xdg-utils 1.1.0~rc1+git20111210-7.1
chromium recommends no packages.
Versions of packages chromium suggests:
pn chromium-l10n <none>
pn mozplugger <none>
-- Configuration Files:
/etc/chromium/default changed [not included]
-- no debconf information
--
brian m. carlson / brian with sandals: Houston, Texas, US
+1 832 623 2791 | http://www.crustytoothpaste.net/~bmc | My opinion only
OpenPGP: RSA v4 4096b: 88AC E9B2 9196 305B A994 7552 F1BA 225C 0223 B187
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 8:07 PM, brian m. carlson wrote:
> Please consider adding this type of human-readable output.
A web search can provide that answer. It would be better to submit
this as an upstream bug anyway.
Best wishes,
Mike
--- End Message ---
