On 03/10/14 16:40, David Howells wrote: > Dmitry Kasatkin <d.kasat...@samsung.com> wrote: > >> BTW. But actually why signer is needed to find the key? >> Every key has unique fingerprint. > The SKID is by no means guaranteed unique, is not mandatory and has no defined > algorithm for generating it.
SKID is unique. SKID == SHA1(PK) I understand that it may be missing for someone. But if it presents in the certificate it should not be a problem... >> Or you say that different certificates might have the same PK? >> What I would consider strange. But anyway, if PK is the same, then >> verification succeed. > Do note: We *do* need to get away from using SKIDs. We have situations where > we have to use a key that doesn't have one. > > David I understand that... What I claim is that if there is a SKID, it is unique and enough to identify certificate in the keyring... Integrity subsystem uses partial SKID and it MUST NOT be broken for compatibility. Dmitry -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
