From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp1 ([2001:41d0:2:bcc0::]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms0.migadu.com with LMTPS id pclyBcgMfGDBAAAAgWs5BA (envelope-from ) for ; Sun, 18 Apr 2021 12:41:12 +0200 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:bcc0::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp1 with LMTPS id GCoiAMgMfGDJPgAAbx9fmQ (envelope-from ) for ; Sun, 18 Apr 2021 10:41:12 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6D9AB15C23 for ; Sun, 18 Apr 2021 12:41:11 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([::1]:40334 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lY4rW-00052p-9g for larch@yhetil.org; Sun, 18 Apr 2021 06:41:10 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:52430) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lY4rO-00051B-MZ for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 18 Apr 2021 06:41:02 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:34003) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lY4rO-0001d7-FE for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 18 Apr 2021 06:41:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lY4rO-0000IB-CN for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 18 Apr 2021 06:41:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: bug#47634: Accompany .asc and .DIGESTS keys for the ISO Resent-From: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-guix@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2021 10:41:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 47634 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix X-GNU-PR-Keywords: To: Carlo Zancanaro Received: via spool by 47634-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B47634.16187424211048 (code B ref 47634); Sun, 18 Apr 2021 10:41:02 +0000 Received: (at 47634) by debbugs.gnu.org; 18 Apr 2021 10:40:21 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:45546 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lY4qi-0000Gq-Sw for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 18 Apr 2021 06:40:21 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:39742) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lY4qh-0000GZ-BN for 47634@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 18 Apr 2021 06:40:19 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:49363) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lY4qb-00011W-Ty; Sun, 18 Apr 2021 06:40:13 -0400 Received: from [2a01:e0a:1d:7270:af76:b9b:ca24:c465] (port=43574 helo=ribbon) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1lY4qa-0005l3-9M; Sun, 18 Apr 2021 06:40:12 -0400 From: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= References: <60cab189-2c49-0f7f-8c32-178220540514@riseup.net> <8624B91E-1A4F-4455-880A-E5664C27D5B1@zancanaro.id.au> <5c01ac9b-74db-42d5-db39-7f287b70255d@riseup.net> <87y2dqlvqj.fsf@zancanaro.id.au> Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2021 12:40:10 +0200 In-Reply-To: <87y2dqlvqj.fsf@zancanaro.id.au> (Carlo Zancanaro's message of "Sat, 10 Apr 2021 12:27:32 +1000") Message-ID: <875z0jlvud.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-guix@gnu.org List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: bo0od , 47634@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "bug-Guix" X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1618742471; h=from:from:sender:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding:resent-cc: resent-from:resent-sender:resent-message-id:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references:list-id:list-help:list-unsubscribe: list-subscribe:list-post; bh=r9avHIVFtm8S/cJxCji3f6FYkTkVKtSej75fH4CvTZ8=; b=krXvvV/s3cNuczcxhX1MBaoBf1fuQerax1PEeNZVmrLXOHEZPwkjuhFtleo2/l2auZIQN1 zC6pMZ1dYXRy4OM+1TGK6CmjjAmhXm+g1gQJQQzUNFU0lJxRp/GFQzzrJwhwp2MF65Nc5u OPBc9obgCW7eo4mCTjurcErBN1bjSfFrqEGQyM+HUJtscSyYbe1vSHaGJiWKDK6Pv93Ekw 4Xg2V493L59yAeebpczrelimsGKJj692kb4yfUrLYr+ABLB5yLH1Uq22B85q7+faM2dnno oFYm03BC9RoTaLDnHqoaSpwOnC4hpola3C6brno+T9djRRDB+IqC4eEJpdqqPg== ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1618742471; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=fZyUEe0pxrkoWWIMucL8NFGp3bqb+AWMk18KQ4RaspGmsaNyjg9duswP3WGQXwgDPWQtFO OEAW29NZEH/5IiAAjZE22EJkOo6DSirkIUQoLRE8aWeFNVrQeU/Ba7La350spmSN3lNtdE itNxGzsYD2HEgnMg4HhSvbJNXfBcNq2XBRWLFSP8ESD28+rSnp7TvQGoW0zpO2lai2jhsd /TjxWPGeCIwOkl+HxP3s75Nv7Qmo0R1SHQAlyExrHQffLAhgc04SS/H5mi7Lgpd/aDIlhc NiH5gDhrOdfnrJWbCyMMfpswQeokz7BYsC5y1iyzF+06a9nI4xfNWVqrKmrJxA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of bug-guix-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=bug-guix-bounces@gnu.org X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -2.94 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=none; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gnu.org; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of bug-guix-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=bug-guix-bounces@gnu.org X-Migadu-Queue-Id: 6D9AB15C23 X-Spam-Score: -2.94 X-Migadu-Scanner: scn0.migadu.com X-TUID: l2B7UWu9tP1V Hi all, Carlo Zancanaro skribis: > I'm not convinced there's much value to add anything beyond the > signatures, and I think there is some cost. Having multiple=20 > verification options makes the download page more confusing (by > providing more choices to do the same thing), and may make it less=20 > likely that people do any verification. Agreed. > I think there may be a larger conversation to have around using > something like Signify rather than PGP/GPG, but I'm not familiar=20 > enough with Signify to have an opinion about that at the moment. Right. OpenPGP isn=E2=80=99t great for software signing, but it=E2=80=99s = widespread, and that=E2=80=99s an important criterion if we are to allow users to authenticate what they download. Tools like Signify are certainly worth looking at, but I see it as a longer-term option. I=E2=80=99m closing this issue since it=E2=80=99s not really actionable. Thanks, Ludo=E2=80=99.