On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 1:01 PM, Jonas Karlsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 16:37:51 +0200, Hisham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 3:43 AM, Jonas Karlsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> There has been a proof of concept where a group of people has injected >>> bad packages into a distribution by asking to be a mirror and providing >>> erroneous updates (1). >>> The issue is not that they provided spoofed, hacked or broken packages, >>> which would fail with bad signature (or the user had to add the key to >>> their keyring), but they used old packages which they updated version >>> information for. An example for GoboLinux would be to repack an old >>> version, Foo--1.2--i686.tar.bz2 as Foo--2.3--i686.tar.bz2 and our tools >>> would be fooled to thing that the latter was an update/later version >>> (you would also change the name of the version directory in the tarball). >>> This meant that users that used that "mirror" would get "updates" that >>> wasn't always up to date and even might have security issues. >>> We need to add version information to our packages, any idea on a good >>> scheme for that? >> >> Yes, we just need to add the full path to the FileHash file entries. >> If they are tampered with, FileHash.sig will alert. Fix committed to >> svn. > > I don't think we should use *full* paths, only <program name>/<version>. > People might not have $goboPrograms at /Programs.
These people better not use the binary packages, for tricky troubles await them if they do. -- Hisham _______________________________________________ gobolinux-devel mailing list gobolinux-devel@lists.gobolinux.org http://lists.gobolinux.org/mailman/listinfo/gobolinux-devel
