Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 2 Oct 2011 15:54:34 -0700 | From | Guenter Roeck <> | Subject | Re: kernel.org status: establishing a PGP web of trust |
| |
On Sun, Oct 02, 2011 at 02:36:05PM -0400, Randy Dunlap wrote: > On 10/02/11 04:54, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Sunday, October 02, 2011, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > >> On 10/01/2011 06:04 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > >>> > >>> OK, I'm taking this as "5 years is fine by us". :-) > >>> > >>> And the recommended procedure for rotating keys seems to be (1) generate > >>> a new key and (2) make as many people as you can sign it before the old > >>> one expires, right? > >>> > >> > >> (3) revoke the old key with a status code of "no longer in use", or just > >> let it expire. > >> > >>>> Some people have decided to opt for an unlimited key, but that > >>>> *requires* that you have a way to revoke the old key, which is why we > >>>> are considering a key revocation escrow service. > >>> > >>> That service will be necessary anyway in case some keys are lost or > >>> compromised. > >>> > >>> I wonder what the procedure of restoring kernel.org access in case one > >>> has lost keys is supposed to be? > >> > >> Get a new key and get it re-signed. > > > > Hmm. That doesn't seem very practical if someone doesn't live close > > to any other core kernel developers. > > > > What number of signatures on the key will be regarded as sufficient? > > > >> We can work out specific details at KS. > > > > Well, the KS is going to be busy time this year I suppose. :-) > > > > What about people who haven't been invited to the KS? > > They (we) should start building a web of trust with local key signings. > I'm already working on that in Portland, Oregon. > Anyone in Silicon Valley looking for key signings, please get in touch.
Thanks, Guenter
| |