On 13/11/15 09:35 +, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 08:30:53PM +, Poulos, Brianna L. wrote:
Hello,
There has recently been additional discussion about the best way to handle
image signature verification in glance and nova [1]. There are two
options being discussed
On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 02:09:42PM -0300, Flavio Percoco wrote:
> On 13/11/15 09:35 +, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> >On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 08:30:53PM +, Poulos, Brianna L. wrote:
> >>Hello,
> >>
> >>There has recently been additional discussion about the best way to handle
> >>image
On 17/11/15 17:44 +, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 02:09:42PM -0300, Flavio Percoco wrote:
On 13/11/15 09:35 +, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 08:30:53PM +, Poulos, Brianna L. wrote:
>>Hello,
>>
>>There has recently been additional discussion
On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 08:30:53PM +, Poulos, Brianna L. wrote:
> Hello,
>
> There has recently been additional discussion about the best way to handle
> image signature verification in glance and nova [1]. There are two
> options being discussed for the signature (the examples below using
>
Hello,
There has recently been additional discussion about the best way to handle
image signature verification in glance and nova [1]. There are two
options being discussed for the signature (the examples below using
'RSA-PSS' as the type, and SHA-256 as the hash method):
1. The signature is of
