rpm --nosignature reversed meaning

[Jeffrey Johnson]

> On Aug 29, 2016, at 10:19 PM, Kacper Kornet <draenog at pld-linux.org> wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 12:53:49AM +0200, Tomasz Pala wrote:
>> Should this work this way? Is it upstream bug or PLD-specific? How about RH-rpm?
> 
> 
>> ~: strace -erecvfrom rpm -qp keepassx-2.0.2-2.x86_64.rpm
>> keepassx-2.0.2-2.x86_64
>> +++ exited with 0 +++
> 
> 
>> ~: strace -erecvfrom rpm --nosignature -qp keepassx-2.0.2-2.x86_64.rpm
>> recvfrom(12, "\25\24\201\200\0\1\0\5\0\0\0\0\2ha\4pool\16sks-keyserv"..., 2048, 0, {sa_family=AF_INET, sin_port=htons(53), sin_addr=inet_addr("8.8.4.4")}, [16]) = 124
>> recvfrom(12, "\"\27\201\200\0\1\0\5\0\0\0\0\2ha\4pool\16sks-keyserv"..., 65536, 0, {sa_family=AF_INET, sin_port=htons(53), sin_addr=inet_addr("8.8.4.4")}, [16]) = 184
>> keepassx-2.0.2-2.x86_64
>> +++ exited with 0 +++
> 
> According to Jeff it's a feature. See his answer:
> 
> http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/pipermail/pld-devel-en/2015-June/024405.html
> 

MANDATORY signature checking (using the non-repudiable signature that has been
generated since 2010 or so) is the feature.

At that point —no signature has very limited usage cases:
1) packages _NOT_ generated by RPM5, or not signed:
	=> Sign the package and import the pubkey used.
2) pubkeys not imported and/or hkp:// disabled
	==> devise your own pubkey distribution

If — as claimed — that —nosignature now has inverted meaning,
then that is a bug with POPT option processing (which likely is doing XOR
on a static bit that has now changed from 1 -> 0)

The path I am on is eliminating —nosignature entirely permitting
signing and pubkey management through any means you choose,
where RPM supplies a non-repudiable signature fallback sufficiently
to attempt MANDATORY signature verification.

hth

73 de Jeff
> -- 
>  Kacper Kornet
> _______________________________________________
> pld-devel-en mailing list
> pld-devel-en at lists.pld-linux.org
> http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en