[Gnu-arch-users] Re: signatures and checking

[Miles Bader]

Tom Lord <address@hidden> writes:
> So I'm back to thinking that the right short term fix for the security
> issue is just to provide, say, an awk script that users can use
> instead of calling gpg (or agpg or whatever) directly in their .check
> files.
> 
> And the right long-term fix is to ask for a new option in gpg.

I'm confused as to why the two issues -- (1) whether the signed checksum
file is parseable without a checker, and (2) how to ensure you get the
signed contents when you _do_ have a checker -- are related.

Surely you can just treat the two cases separately:

Ask gpg (or whatever) to deliver the contents in case (2), by having a
`.arch-params/signing/*.contents' script, and just parse them directly in
case (1) (which is when you _don't_ have the script).

This would do the right thing, be simple to implement, not require any
awk scripts, and not require any new options to gpg....

-Miles
-- 
"Though they may have different meanings, the cries of 'Yeeeee-haw!' and
 'Allahu akbar!' are, in spirit, not actually all that different."