linux-kernel - Re: kernel.org status: establishing a PGP web of trust

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 6 Oct 2011 11:05:53 +0100
From:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To:	Adrian Bunk <bunk@...sta.de>
Cc:	Arnaud Lacombe <lacombar@...il.com>, Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu,
	"Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@...hat.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>
Subject: Re: kernel.org status: establishing a PGP web of trust

> When you add a Signed-off-by: to a patch you have to use your real name

Don't confuse real name and legal name. In particular remember

- Not all countries have a notion of legal name
- In many places 'real' and legal names are not particularly tied together
- Both legal and real names change but there is no kernel facility to
  update existing sign offs.
- Some cultures have multiple names for people as the norm
- A lot of signed off entries are transliterated (We don't have many
  signed off in Japanese or Chinese for example but mostly in
  transliterated form)
- The "official" transliterations vary by country, and no specific
  transliteration or indeed specific language is necessarily correct
- In many cases it is possible to change your "real" name to a nickname,
  (and indeed back again). Genuine UK names for official purposes include
  people like Mr Telephone Booth (changed his name for charity and kept
  it), and "Fruitbat".

So can I suggest we leave that quagmire for Google+ to sink into and
flounder and stay well out of it.

A key merely proves that the person who signed the object had access to
the key. A signed key merely proves that someone or indeed something with
access to the relevant key data signed it. Even in person signing proves
surprisingly little.  (Ob amusement - can one of a pair of identical
twins ever become a Debian developer)

It's an administrative convenience.

Signing patches is also only useful for tracing probable origin. It
doesn't prove they are any good. That's one reason I never signed any
security announcement when I was the CERT contact, it forced people to
check the announcement and advice made sense.

Alan
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/