On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 11:31:26PM +0100, Ignat Korchagin wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 6:56 PM, Jon McCune wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 6:45 AM, Daniel Kiper wrote:
> >>
> >> On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 12:00:08PM +, Ignat Korchagin wrote:
> >> > Reposting this, as requested by Daniel a
On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 11:25:30PM +0100, Ignat Korchagin wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 3:45 PM, Daniel Kiper wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 12:00:08PM +, Ignat Korchagin wrote:
> >> Reposting this, as requested by Daniel and rebasing on current tree.
> >>
> >> Currently GRUB2 verify lo
On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 6:56 PM, Jon McCune wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 6:45 AM, Daniel Kiper wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 12:00:08PM +, Ignat Korchagin wrote:
>> > Reposting this, as requested by Daniel and rebasing on current tree.
>> >
>> > Currently GRUB2 verify logic searche
On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 3:45 PM, Daniel Kiper wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 12:00:08PM +, Ignat Korchagin wrote:
>> Reposting this, as requested by Daniel and rebasing on current tree.
>>
>> Currently GRUB2 verify logic searches PGP keyid only in unhashed subpackets
>> of PGP signature pac
On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 6:45 AM, Daniel Kiper wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 12:00:08PM +, Ignat Korchagin wrote:
> > Reposting this, as requested by Daniel and rebasing on current tree.
> >
> > Currently GRUB2 verify logic searches PGP keyid only in unhashed
> subpackets of PGP signature p
On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 12:00:08PM +, Ignat Korchagin wrote:
> Reposting this, as requested by Daniel and rebasing on current tree.
>
> Currently GRUB2 verify logic searches PGP keyid only in unhashed subpackets
> of PGP signature packet. As a result, signatures generated with GoLang
> openpg
A little busy now, but will try to send the patch this week.
On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 12:42 PM, Daniel Kiper wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 13, 2016 at 12:18:05PM +0300, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:
> > 10.11.2016 16:50, Daniel Kiper ??:
> > > On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 10:32:13PM +0100, Ignat Korchagin wr
On Sun, Nov 13, 2016 at 12:18:05PM +0300, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:
> 10.11.2016 16:50, Daniel Kiper ??:
> > On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 10:32:13PM +0100, Ignat Korchagin wrote:
> >> Is this going to 2.02? I think it should, because it is a bug.
> >
> > Andrei, could you take care of it?
> >
>
>
10.11.2016 16:50, Daniel Kiper пишет:
> On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 10:32:13PM +0100, Ignat Korchagin wrote:
>> Is this going to 2.02? I think it should, because it is a bug.
>
> Andrei, could you take care of it?
>
Yes, I will. I'd also appreciate refreshed patch against current tree.
> Ignat, ple
On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 10:32:13PM +0100, Ignat Korchagin wrote:
> Is this going to 2.02? I think it should, because it is a bug.
Andrei, could you take care of it?
Ignat, please repost this (taking into acount Andrei comments)
as separate email with proper SOB, etc.
Daniel
Is this going to 2.02? I think it should, because it is a bug.
On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 5:54 PM, Ignat Korchagin wrote:
> Best of both worlds: I left the READBUF_SIZE as is for the rest of the code,
> but rather reallocate the buffer with appropriate length for subpackets
> specifically. Hashing
Best of both worlds: I left the READBUF_SIZE as is for the rest of the code,
but rather reallocate the buffer with appropriate length for subpackets
specifically. Hashing is outside of the keyid search function, so the name is
good this time.
Still did not get your response about PGP private te
Was preparing test data for the above patch. I wanted to reuse files
and keys in tests/file_filter. There are two files: keys and keys.pub.
I assumed first one is private key, while the other one is public.
However, it seems that keys is public as well. Is the test private key
for this public key a
> TBH I still think that simply setting READBUF_SIZE to 64K is the simplest
> solution.
I would agree, but I was just a little concerned about allocating
large buffer. I'm not sure whether GRUB is considered to be able to
run on very resource constrained environments and it seemed that
per-subpac
30.03.2016 17:09, Ignat Korchagin пишет:
> Implemented as a separate function which should process arbitrary length data.
TBH I still think that simply setting READBUF_SIZE to 64K is the
simplest solution.
> As for tests, it seems that the easiest way is to add this signature
to tests/file_filter
Implemented as a separate function which should process arbitrary length data.
As for tests, it seems that the easiest way is to add this signature to
tests/file_filter. Not sure how should I send you the patch with binary data
though.
diff --git a/grub-core/commands/verify.c b/grub-core/comman
On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 11:47 AM, Ignat Korchagin wrote:
> Well the code was copied from handling unhashed subpackets and has
> same assumptions. I do agree that it does not handle arbitrary length
> data. But if you consider it wrong, it should be changed for both
> hashed and unhashed packets. C
Well the code was copied from handling unhashed subpackets and has
same assumptions. I do agree that it does not handle arbitrary length
data. But if you consider it wrong, it should be changed for both
hashed and unhashed packets. Currently, for example, if the length of
unhashed subpackets will b
29.03.2016 22:02, Ignat Korchagin пишет:
> Currently GRUB2 verify logic searches PGP keyid only in unhashed subpackets
> of PGP signature packet. As a result, signatures generated with GoLang
> openpgp package (https://godoc.org/golang.org/x/crypto/openpgp) could not be
> verified, because this
19 matches
Mail list logo
