Discussion:
[Sks-devel] Raising the floor for the pool to SKS version 1.1.6 [was: Re: Importing ed25519 subkeys from SKS < 1.1.6]
Daniel Kahn Gillmor
2017-09-06 22:16:38 UTC
Permalink
(adding sks-devel to this thread since it discussies changing the
minimum bar for the pool)
including all of the RSA and DSA subkeys. But not the original
requested ed25519 key. It seems SKS 1.1.5 partly supports ed25519 keys
but for example does not return them.
No, 1.1.5 supports RFC6637 but not the ed25519/curve25519 variants
Hopefully the remaining SKS 1.1.5 installations will soon update to
1.1.6 which does not have this problem.
hkp://subset.pool.sks-keyservers.net requires SKS 1.1.6, I've been
pondering requiring the main pool to use this , which can be discussed
if we want to push ed25510/curve25519
SKS 1.1.6 was released over 1 year ago (on 2016-08-07). It is well
tested and widely deployed.

looking at https://sks-keyservers.net/status/ -- i'd say we can afford
to move to SKS 1.1.6 for the main pool.

We will (temporarily) go from 116 members of the main pool to 85 -- a
loss of about 25%. But we also provide an incentive for those members
to upgrade to 1.1.6, so i expect we'll make some of that back.

We only lose 3 members from the hkps pool, and 2 members from the
onionbalance, so i'd recommend making it a minimum there too.

About feasibility of upgrades: version-wise, people tend to treat debian
as the "old, out of date distro", and for debian:

* Debian stable (stretch) has SKS 1.1.6.

* people running debian oldstable (jessie) can install 1.1.6 from
jessie-backports.

People running keyservers on ubuntu LTS will need to find a PPA or some
other alternative (xenial offers only 1.1.5 in universe), but so it goes
:/ (I note that a previous attempt to get a backport into an ubuntu LTS
appears to have gone unresolved:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/trusty-backports/+bug/1435397 -- but perhaps
micahg can be convinced to update his ppa in a similar way at least)

I recommend requiring at least SKS 1.1.6 for membership in all the
pools.

--dkg
Kristian Fiskerstrand
2017-09-06 22:33:51 UTC
Permalink
On 09/07/2017 12:16 AM, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
4
Post by Daniel Kahn Gillmor
We will (temporarily) go from 116 members of the main pool to 85 -- a
loss of about 25%. But we also provide an incentive for those members
to upgrade to 1.1.6, so i expect we'll make some of that back.
We only lose 3 members from the hkps pool, and 2 members from the
onionbalance, so i'd recommend making it a minimum there too.
Yup, already executed, and with a few renewals of HKPS executed for
1.1.6 servers we're net -1 on HKPS.
Post by Daniel Kahn Gillmor
I recommend requiring at least SKS 1.1.6 for membership in all the
pools.
already done
--
----------------------------
Kristian Fiskerstrand
Blog: https://blog.sumptuouscapital.com
Twitter: @krifisk
----------------------------
Public OpenPGP keyblock at hkp://pool.sks-keyservers.net
fpr:94CB AFDD 3034 5109 5618 35AA 0B7F 8B60 E3ED FAE3
----------------------------
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right
to say it."
Evelyn Beatrice Hall (summarizing Voltaire
Jeremy T. Bouse
2017-09-07 02:56:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kristian Fiskerstrand
4
Post by Daniel Kahn Gillmor
We will (temporarily) go from 116 members of the main pool to 85 -- a
loss of about 25%. But we also provide an incentive for those members
to upgrade to 1.1.6, so i expect we'll make some of that back.
We only lose 3 members from the hkps pool, and 2 members from the
onionbalance, so i'd recommend making it a minimum there too.
Yup, already executed, and with a few renewals of HKPS executed for
1.1.6 servers we're net -1 on HKPS.
    This really means I need to get off my duff and get you a CSR
renewal for mine that has expired and I've just been too busy of late to
get a CSR generated.
Post by Kristian Fiskerstrand
Post by Daniel Kahn Gillmor
I recommend requiring at least SKS 1.1.6 for membership in all the
pools.
already done
Kristian Fiskerstrand
2017-09-06 22:41:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Daniel Kahn Gillmor
We only lose 3 members from the hkps pool, and 2 members from the
onionbalance, so i'd recommend making it a minimum there too.
Just for clarification, main pool will always be a superset of both HKPS
and onionbalance, so any increase in requirement in main pool will
automatically affect the subpools.
--
----------------------------
Kristian Fiskerstrand
Blog: https://blog.sumptuouscapital.com
Twitter: @krifisk
----------------------------
Public OpenPGP keyblock at hkp://pool.sks-keyservers.net
fpr:94CB AFDD 3034 5109 5618 35AA 0B7F 8B60 E3ED FAE3
----------------------------
Aquila non capit muscas
The eagle does not hunt flies
Loading...