From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: TLS certificate on elpa.gnu.org Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2018 18:29:29 +0200 Message-ID: <83efm0afbq.fsf@gnu.org> References: <314F38A2-9B19-46C2-809A-FAFB5B5EC822@gmail.com> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1517761719 7788 195.159.176.226 (4 Feb 2018 16:28:39 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2018 16:28:39 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Neil Okamoto Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Feb 04 17:28:35 2018 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1eiN9Z-0001Td-9r for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 04 Feb 2018 17:28:29 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:40112 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eiNBa-0006YI-Ji for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 04 Feb 2018 11:30:34 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:46425) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eiNAm-0006Xy-CA for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 04 Feb 2018 11:29:45 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eiNAi-0007F4-EQ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 04 Feb 2018 11:29:44 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:58883) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eiNAi-0007F0-Aa; Sun, 04 Feb 2018 11:29:40 -0500 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=2925 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1eiNAh-0006Dv-NY; Sun, 04 Feb 2018 11:29:40 -0500 In-reply-to: <314F38A2-9B19-46C2-809A-FAFB5B5EC822@gmail.com> (message from Neil Okamoto on Sat, 3 Feb 2018 19:13:03 -0800) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:222508 Archived-At: > From: Neil Okamoto > Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2018 19:13:03 -0800 > > elpa.gnu.org seems to be malformed in a way that causes some SSL analyzers to warn about “extra certs”. > > For instance https://www.ssllabs.com/ssltest/analyze.html?d=elpa.gnu.org reports > > Certificates provided | 3 (3732 bytes) > Chain issues | Incorrect order, Extra certs > > And of the three certificates found, it appears certificate[0] and certificate[1] are identical. Is the duplication > considered "out of order?” > > Because indeed, on older variants of Ubuntu where gnutls-cli v2.12.23 is in use (this is the case for the > container infrastructure on Travis CI), we have this: > > # gnutls-cli -v > gnutls-cli (GnuTLS) 2.12.23 > Packaged by Debian (2.12.23-12ubuntu2.8) > Copyright (C) 2012 Free Software Foundation, Inc. > License GPLv3+: GNU GPL version 3 or later . > This is free software: you are free to change and redistribute it. > There is NO WARRANTY, to the extent permitted by law. Isn't this an awfully old version of GnuTLS? I have here 3.4.15, and it doesn't complain about the GNU ELPA certificate. It says "Status: The certificate is trusted." > It’s causing me to introduce workarounds, such as downloading a newer gnutls source package and > compiling it locally in the Travis CI build. I would really prefer not to do this. It adds unnecessary time and > complexity to the CI setup for some Emacs packages, and (conversely) one can imagine other Emacs > package maintainers may be avoiding the complexity by not implementing CI for their projects. > > Can someone more knowledgable about the standards, the evolution of gnutls since 2.12, and the server > configuration of elope.gnu.org please weigh in on this? I'm not such an expert on this, but in general, security assumes latest versions of related software and databases.