summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorJeremy Spilman <jeremy@taplink.co>2014-01-01 02:02:02 -0800
committerbitcoindev <bitcoindev@gnusha.org>2014-01-01 10:02:40 +0000
commit340d1ce4159da50ca6102e073da1302b027c513a (patch)
treeacb2ae0794c7bb59dd8e9da28d280d4922a85d9f
parent5dad899fc2e4a5a19209db5dfc1de557932dd3af (diff)
downloadpi-bitcoindev-340d1ce4159da50ca6102e073da1302b027c513a.tar.gz
pi-bitcoindev-340d1ce4159da50ca6102e073da1302b027c513a.zip
Re: [Bitcoin-development] Dedicated server for bitcoin.org, your thoughts?
-rw-r--r--ff/8d127e5119cf53adf6e1eeda27e00fa667e1fa123
1 files changed, 123 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/ff/8d127e5119cf53adf6e1eeda27e00fa667e1fa b/ff/8d127e5119cf53adf6e1eeda27e00fa667e1fa
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..c44009146
--- /dev/null
+++ b/ff/8d127e5119cf53adf6e1eeda27e00fa667e1fa
@@ -0,0 +1,123 @@
+Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194]
+ helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
+ by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
+ (envelope-from <jeremy@taplink.co>) id 1VyIdM-00072t-7L
+ for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
+ Wed, 01 Jan 2014 10:02:40 +0000
+Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of taplink.co
+ designates 50.117.27.232 as permitted sender)
+ client-ip=50.117.27.232; envelope-from=jeremy@taplink.co;
+ helo=mail.taplink.co;
+Received: from mail.taplink.co ([50.117.27.232])
+ by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with smtp (Exim 4.76)
+ id 1VyIdL-0000Ra-7O for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
+ Wed, 01 Jan 2014 10:02:40 +0000
+Received: from laptop-air.hsd1.ca.comcast.net ([192.168.168.135]) by
+ mail.taplink.co ; Wed, 1 Jan 2014 02:06:00 -0800
+Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15; format=flowed; delsp=yes
+To: "Gregory Maxwell" <gmaxwell@gmail.com>, "Mike Hearn" <mike@plan99.net>,
+ "Matt Corallo" <bitcoin-list@bluematt.me>
+References: <52A3C8A5.7010606@gmail.com>
+ <1795f3067ba3fcdd0caf978cc59ff024.squirrel@fruiteater.riseup.net>
+ <52A435EA.7090405@gmail.com> <201312081237.24473.luke@dashjr.org>
+ <CANAnSg2OrmQAcZ+cZdtQeADicH3U29QOgYPfP1AQhOMP6+P1wg@mail.gmail.com>
+ <CAAS2fgR0khyJxmz9c2Oc87hOFgiNuiPJuaeugGajdo_EcKEW9w@mail.gmail.com>
+ <20131212205106.GA4572@netbook.cypherspace.org>
+ <CANAnSg3nPhrk2k=yDKf39AuBQnSuTWJbgANdMhGe=soiOy0NTw@mail.gmail.com>
+ <CAAS2fgTmWRMxYweu3sNn_X7grgjUqTQujM-DbZRxG_YMZnD=7g@mail.gmail.com>
+ <CANEZrP2X_63qkuNuk0MvsLR9ewd7HR0mPVaD7bZSgWMTJ5-9FQ@mail.gmail.com>
+ <CAAS2fgQmMZ6RYjbJ6ZfFO5+ZhZoR4d4yMf8CXLXKPmZt3-Je4Q@mail.gmail.com>
+ <CANEZrP1mdJNa7ADkUXTGDNKMSCROjGAVbMXZXxodxCz1LFDzZw@mail.gmail.com>
+ <op.w8y642nryldrnw@laptop-air.hsd1.ca.comcast.net>
+ <4264e886-48de-40ac-921a-a60502595060@email.android.com>
+Date: Wed, 01 Jan 2014 02:02:02 -0800
+MIME-Version: 1.0
+Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
+From: "Jeremy Spilman" <jeremy@taplink.co>
+Organization: TapLink
+Message-ID: <op.w8z55onhyldrnw@laptop-air.hsd1.ca.comcast.net>
+In-Reply-To: <4264e886-48de-40ac-921a-a60502595060@email.android.com>
+User-Agent: Opera Mail/1.0 (Win32)
+oclient: 192.168.168.135#jeremy@taplink.co#465
+X-Spam-Score: -1.5 (-)
+X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
+ See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
+ -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for
+ sender-domain
+ -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
+ -0.1 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay
+ domain
+ 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
+ not necessarily valid
+ 0.0 T_DKIM_INVALID DKIM-Signature header exists but is not valid
+X-Headers-End: 1VyIdL-0000Ra-7O
+Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
+Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Dedicated server for bitcoin.org,
+ your thoughts?
+X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
+X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
+Precedence: list
+List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
+List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
+ <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
+List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
+List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
+List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
+List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
+ <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
+X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 01 Jan 2014 10:02:40 -0000
+
+So I looked into gitian, the first thing I noticed was the hashes that
+people were signing, for example:
+
+ https://github.com/bitcoin/gitian.sigs/blob/master/0.8.6-win32/gavinandresen/bitcoin-build.assert
+
+don't match the hash of the file 'bitcoin-0.8.6-win32-setup.exe' actually
+hosted by sourceforce. That was a bit alarming at first, but I talked to
+BlueMatt and maaku on IRC and the difference is due to Gavin Authenticode
+signing the executable for windows.
+
+BlueMatt asked if someone could implement in gitian-downloader a way to
+strip off the signature so that we could get back to the raw binary with a
+hash that matches what everyone is producing from gitian. I found:
+
+ http://blog.didierstevens.com/programs/disitool/
+
+which is a Python script which can strip the signature nicely, but the
+hashes still don't match.
+
+I couldn't find a gitian build of 0.8.6 so I built my own, and after
+verifying the hash for v0.8.6 was '49547ff9...' as expected I looked at
+the hex diff between that and the sig-stripped .exe from sourceforge, and
+the only two differences are:
+
+ - At offset D8 the stripped file has '5D E2 B2' versus 'F9 F4 00' in the
+gitian build
+ - The sig-stripped file has an extra byte '00' at the end
+
+I started to look at the file spec for windows PE files and quickly
+thought better of it. Maybe someone better informed can chime in on what
+those three bytes at offset D8 specify.
+
+I'm not sure if we want to patch the signature onto the gitian build, or
+strip the signature off of the Gavin-signed build, but something of the
+sort is necessary if you want get gitian-downloader to match the official
+distro (for Windows at least).
+
+In any case, I think wallet users want to know when an upgrade is
+available, and ability to click an 'update' button get a binary they can
+trust. It's not a problem unique to bitcoind, deterministic builds are
+awesome, but I don't think fully solve it.
+
+Thanks,
+Jeremy
+
+On Tue, 31 Dec 2013 13:33:54 -0800, Matt Corallo
+<bitcoin-list@bluematt.me> wrote:
+
+> We already have a wonderful system for secure updating -
+> gitian-downloader. We just neither use it >not bother making actual
+> gitian releases so anyone can use it to verify signatures of downloads.
+
+
+