On Sat, Aug 22, 2020 at 3:21 AM Slawomir Jaranowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> sob., 22 sie 2020 o 02:07 Tatu Saloranta <[email protected]> napisał(a):
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 3:06 PM Slawomir Jaranowski
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > pt., 21 sie 2020 o 22:50 Tatu Saloranta <[email protected]> napisał(a):
>> >>
>> >> On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 1:45 PM Slawomir Jaranowski 
>> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> The latest release of  jackson artifact is signed by pgp key which is 
>> >>> strange for me, because doesn't have uid in key.
>> >>>
>> >>> https://hkps.pool.sks-keyservers.net/pks/lookup?op=vindex&fingerprint=on&search=0x8A10792983023D5D14C93B488D7F1BEC1E2ECAE7
>> >>>
>> >>> Please confirm that this key belong to someone how has privilege to 
>> >>> release new version of project
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Yes, this is the gpg key I generated after earlier expired by 2020-07-25. 
>> >> Not sure why Brew-installated gnupg created something without uid, I just 
>> >> used defaults suggested.
>> >>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> It is difficult to verify signature, eg:
>> >>>
>> >>> gpg --recv-keys 8A10792983023D5D14C93B488D7F1BEC1E2ECAE7
>> >>> gpg: key 8D7F1BEC1E2ECAE7: no user ID
>> >>> gpg: Total number processed: 1
>> >>>
>> >>> gpg --verify 
>> >>> ~/.m2/repository/com/fasterxml/jackson/core/jackson-databind/2.11.2/jackson-databind-2.11.2.jar.asc
>> >>> gpg: assuming signed data in 
>> >>> '...m2/repository/com/fasterxml/jackson/core/jackson-databind/2.11.2/jackson-databind-2.11.2.jar'
>> >>> gpg: Signature made Sun Aug  2 20:36:50 2020 CEST
>> >>> gpg:                using RSA key 
>> >>> 8A10792983023D5D14C93B488D7F1BEC1E2ECAE7
>> >>> gpg: Can't check signature: No public key
>> >>>
>> >>> ***************************************
>> >>>
>> >>> Another case: jackson-databind-2.11.0.jar - has bad signature ... it can 
>> >>> looks like someone change content of jackson-databind-2.11.0.jar
>> >>>
>> >>> gpg --verify 
>> >>> ~/.m2/repository/com/fasterxml/jackson/core/jackson-databind/2.11.0/jackson-databind-2.11.0.jar.asc
>> >>> gpg: assuming signed data in 
>> >>> '..m2/repository/com/fasterxml/jackson/core/jackson-databind/2.11.0/jackson-databind-2.11.0.jar'
>> >>> gpg: Signature made Sun Apr 26 02:16:05 2020 CEST
>> >>> gpg:                using RSA key 
>> >>> 6214760097DC5CFAD0175AC2C9FBAA83A8753994
>> >>> gpg: BAD signature from "Tatu Saloranta (cowtowncoder) 
>> >>> <[email protected]>" [expired]
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> I am not sure why you think there is something wrong with that key: 
>> >> perhaps gpg messages are bit misleading here.
>> >> While the key is now expired, it was valid at the time of signing. Key 
>> >> expiration is defined at creation
>> >> and is immutable; this for security reasons (so that even if one 
>> >> accidentally exposes key, it will not be valid for use forever).
>> >> At least that is how I understand above.
>> >
>> >
>> > Expired key hasn't impact on verification.
>> >
>> > pom, has correct signature
>> >
>> > gpg --verify 
>> > ~/.m2/repository/com/fasterxml/jackson/core/jackson-databind/2.11.0/jackson-databind-2.11.0.pom.asc
>> > gpg: assuming signed data in 
>> > '....m2/repository/com/fasterxml/jackson/core/jackson-databind/2.11.0/jackson-databind-2.11.0.pom'
>> > gpg: Signature made Sun Apr 26 02:16:06 2020 CEST
>> > gpg:                using RSA key 6214760097DC5CFAD0175AC2C9FBAA83A8753994
>> > gpg: Good signature from "Tatu Saloranta (cowtowncoder) 
>> > <[email protected]>" [expired]
>> > gpg: Note: This key has expired!
>> > Primary key fingerprint: 6214 7600 97DC 5CFA D017  5AC2 C9FB AA83 A875 3994
>>
>> Ah, I see. Yes, I misread what you said and assumed you were referring
>> to expired key.
>>
>> If I remember correctly, Sonatype Nexus was having serious performance
>> issue at the time when 2.11.0 was released and (I think)
>> managed to deploy partial release somehow. I tried to make a new
>> release which was (somewhat correctly) blocked by Nexus.
>> I worked with Sonatype support people to try to get a working version
>> published, but I think they may have copied over bad mix
>> of artifacts in which signature file for jar was not from same release
>> set as jar itself.
>>
>> I tried to find the Jira issue since I think I had to file one -- this
>> to make sure I my recollection with incident is related to problem you
>> see
>> -- but could not quite locate it (see https://issues.sonatype.org/).
>>
>> At this point I would just suggest avoiding that version: 2.11.2 is
>> already out and should not suffer from the same problem.
>>
>> As to 2.11.0 problem itself: only Sonatype could help with the
>> official artifact, but I suspect that even if that was rectified (by
>> building from 2.12.0 release tag in git repo, which is easy enough)
>> there is the problem of Maven repository caching, propagation to
>> various secondary repos etc.
>
>
> Thanks for your clarification.
> I redownload artifacts and signature for Maven Central and signature is OK 
> for jackson-databind-2.11.0.jar
>
> Probably was some problem during the first download.

Thank you for verifying and apologies for the mess.
The reason I remember the incident is just that the timing was so
unfortunate: right when the official 2.11.0
was released (and not during release candidates or so) :)

-+ Tatu +-

>
>
> --
> Sławomir Jaranowski
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "jackson-dev" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to [email protected].
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jackson-dev/CAGjJkv1q4%3DzG4wbRR7Kv2167%3D3jgqy10D%2BHuTDPONYh6yHdtTw%40mail.gmail.com.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"jackson-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jackson-dev/CAL4a10i0w7esjEyFpLiAi8Tbkv9qgc05cbATp%3DrxgK6QZxbrVw%40mail.gmail.com.

Reply via email to