From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Robert Pluim Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#33825: 25.2; , Failing to verify signature for ELPA debbugs package Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 11:07:32 +0200 Message-ID: References: <888db897-c9c8-107e-cacf-c5972a2c94d6@posteo.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="266207"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" Cc: 33825@debbugs.gnu.org, clemera To: Stefan Kangas Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Sep 16 11:08:28 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1i9mzj-0017B7-UX for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 16 Sep 2019 11:08:28 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:60190 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1i9mzi-0001nW-OB for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 16 Sep 2019 05:08:26 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:36268) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1i9mzL-0001mK-Ji for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 16 Sep 2019 05:08:04 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1i9mzK-0000Hq-8K for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 16 Sep 2019 05:08:03 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:40375) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1i9mzJ-0000Hk-VY for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 16 Sep 2019 05:08:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1i9mzJ-0007Yt-NU for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 16 Sep 2019 05:08:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Robert Pluim Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 09:08:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 33825 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 33825-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B33825.156862486429040 (code B ref 33825); Mon, 16 Sep 2019 09:08:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 33825) by debbugs.gnu.org; 16 Sep 2019 09:07:44 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:49196 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1i9mz1-0007YK-SN for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 16 Sep 2019 05:07:44 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-wm1-f48.google.com ([209.85.128.48]:38531) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1i9myz-0007Y4-7W for 33825@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 16 Sep 2019 05:07:42 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-wm1-f48.google.com with SMTP id o184so9294344wme.3 for <33825@debbugs.gnu.org>; Mon, 16 Sep 2019 02:07:41 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:to:cc:subject:references:mail-copies-to:gmane-reply-to-list :date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=/hAvgBqxcWvwfFRGYbFxFqxsw6L1ubYk13j8Ikiqfxw=; b=uBIvoyueeG46yyi6ClJh3ZgqeRSlXU+ZJXI1Zg0sZOqNmasAm9q5O4Tot/cQuNQWCX P3VkILJFfMdDRFrCcD1zZLQufrfFBYtmfWd20KZflkiTnYkC/IbcFWcnPc+WpMFUTsM9 l6wQevOiuTRtR9wUGTarY70H1XRUInvSIaed0DEsOfjssjtoFz49KwweHKt2nYNDzEmn GQhGX1VIiMnHG0pnxxDVEZj96q7/u+AN/ffhzB3NFUpE+/DVOeryw2GmNyPTwhkhdtET e8ziyV4sC/JzbrUD0F7nbgV3kplBWpkhRuTdFjxBlIsguqe69MPjjFen1/g51DEeyW5j 9Dxg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:references:mail-copies-to :gmane-reply-to-list:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding; bh=/hAvgBqxcWvwfFRGYbFxFqxsw6L1ubYk13j8Ikiqfxw=; b=BhLw7w+65pOmh3qoXKDqocglU+35b3CnI4SEX+L2l5595MLhQSDsBDOxWSEdWPFx3W t38VrgRDnw7k76GYaPBTvVN92IXE13NbFWx29LMfPp4LCi92IQUFy6l/NHDEBmktyy1v YxOyJBXI6r7BEqUwlQsyxTP0b/VYWsIGJ3b97LYt6qyzcQT7mOQYPsJ7T6gwSAtyirmk 5uLlw0wq/jmbDRxoCUKtUJqBkJJA7F8aO0hSYeS3RWRCQQ5Y/jiJmi76AwfXH3yXAZ/A N5YxAWvtLL+cS94DemZocDlBk0qdMdA1UV9yCAM5mPrYZcJPRRClQdFEvFF0zP+OiZ1e ITiw== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAX6uAbn3dhZpVoyozwDXZviE2ZIm7HDG9btN/kDtTaPhCKxi0wq 9e/AmFh6VsoMIrAIGu91Fh491gm6 X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzBBTpB9OfBq5sDeAZUOhmOFPdXoPVRgxxY6tdFwuEW8UYEbdrLHZURSFlANxzR3HCWMA36SA== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:f518:: with SMTP id t24mr12492913wmh.98.1568624854798; Mon, 16 Sep 2019 02:07:34 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from rpluim-mac ([2a01:e34:ecfc:a860:849:285f:e130:f63b]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a18sm63458112wrh.25.2019.09.16.02.07.33 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 16 Sep 2019 02:07:33 -0700 (PDT) Mail-Copies-To: never Gmane-Reply-To-List: yes In-Reply-To: (Stefan Kangas's message of "Fri, 13 Sep 2019 21:50:27 +0200") X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 209.51.188.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:166544 Archived-At: >>>>> On Fri, 13 Sep 2019 21:50:27 +0200, Stefan Kangas = said: Stefan> Robert Pluim writes: >> clemera writes: >>=20 >>>> FWIW, it verifies fine here with Emacs 25.2 >>>=20 >>> I tried it again and now it works for me, too. Strange..., what cou= ld >>> have caused that it failed before? >>=20 >> There are 'transparent' proxies which will untar archives and then >> retar them, resulting in a file that fails signature verification ev= en >> though the contents are identical. When you then repeat the download, >> the proxy knows it has previously inspected the file, and thus lets >> through the original. Using https solves this issue 99% of the time. >>=20 >> If you=CA=BCre using https already, then I=CA=BCm out of ideas :-) Stefan> The reporter verified he was indeed using http. Is there anyth= ing Stefan> that can or should be done here, or is this to be closed as not= abug? I think this is notabug. We can always reopen it if needed. Robert