linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] asm-generic: kill <asm/segment.h> and improve nommu generic uaccess helpers

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, 16 May 2019 22:33:59 +0200
From:   Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] asm-generic: kill <asm/segment.h> and improve nommu
 generic uaccess helpers

On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 8:41 PM Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 5:09 AM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> wrote:
> >
> >   git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/arnd/asm-generic.git
> > tags/asm-generic-nommu
>
> Interesting. I haven't seen this error before:
>
>   # gpg: Signature made Tue 23 Apr 2019 12:54:49 PM PDT
>   # gpg:                using RSA key 60AB47FFC9095227
>   # gpg: bad data signature from key 60AB47FFC9095227: Wrong key usage
> (0x00, 0x4)
>   # gpg: Can't check signature: Wrong key usage
>
> I think it means that you signed it with a key that was marked for
> encryption only or something like that.
>
> But gpg being the wonderful self-explanatory great UX that it is, I
> have no effin clue what it really means.

Same here.

> Looking at the git history, it turns out this has happened a before
> from you, and in fact goes back to pull requests from 2012.
>
> Either I just didn't notice - which sounds unlikely for something that
> has been going on for 7+ years - or the actual check and error is new
> to gpg, and I only notice it this merge window because I've upgraded
> to F30.

I have reconfigured it locally now and pushed an identical tag with a
new signature. Can you see if that gives you the same warning if you
try to pull that?

      Arnd