Note: This is a public test instance of Red Hat Bugzilla. The data contained within is a snapshot of the live data so any changes you make will not be reflected in the production Bugzilla. Email is disabled so feel free to test any aspect of the site that you want. File any problems you find or give feedback at bugzilla.redhat.com.
Bug 2174373 - rpm should not use short gpg key ids in messages
Summary: rpm should not use short gpg key ids in messages
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED UPSTREAM
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: rpm
Version: rawhide
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
unspecified
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Packaging Maintenance Team
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2023-03-01 11:13 UTC by Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
Modified: 2023-07-04 10:03 UTC (History)
5 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2023-07-04 10:03:40 UTC
Type: Bug
Embargoed:

Attachments (Terms of Use)


Links
System ID Private Priority Status Summary Last Updated
Red Hat Bugzilla 2170878 0 unspecified CLOSED Insecure installed RPMs (like Google Chrome) prevent system updates in F38, can't be removed 2023-10-06 18:41:12 UTC

Description Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek 2023-03-01 11:13:54 UTC 
Description of problem:
(Inspired by #2170878.)
Short gpg key ids are easy to spoof and generally should not be used [e.g. 1].
rpm prints them in various messages:

  warning: google-chrome-stable_current_x86_64.rpm: Header V4 DSA/SHA1 Signature, key ID 7fac5991: NOKEY

There is really no point in trying to save a few bytes. Please print at least the "long" 16-digit hash. With the short id the user cannot even reliably look up the key online.

In other output, please print the full hash:
$ rpm -qi util-linux | rg Signature
Signature   : RSA/SHA256, Sat 21 Jan 2023 11:02:21 AM CET, Key ID 809a8d7ceb10b464

The full finger print is 6A51BBABBA3D5467B6171221809A8D7CEB10B464
and it is just easier to do verification if the full hash is known.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
rpm-4.18.0-10.fc38.x86_64

[1] https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/84280/short-openpgp-key-ids-are-insecure-how-to-configure-gnupg-to-use-long-key-ids-i
Comment 1 Panu Matilainen 2023-03-01 11:19:38 UTC 
Bugs that aren't Fedora specific are best filed upstream.

While I generally agree on this, various software actually parses these messages and *will* break if/when changed.
Comment 2 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek 2023-03-01 11:25:16 UTC 
→ https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/2403
Comment 3 Panu Matilainen 2023-07-04 10:03:40 UTC 
Closing for upstream tracking.
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.