oxidecomputer / oxidecomputer/packer-plugin-oxide
Sign releases using GPG
Open
Nobody has claimed this yet.
Packer Plugin
Task
- Dominant language
- Go
- Stars
- 2
- Forks
- 1
- Avg merge
- 3h 9m
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 3
Description
Sign releases using GPG when it makes sense to do so. Originally it was decided not to sign releases with GPG for the following reasons.
- The
packer initcommand does not do any GPG verification when downloading and installing plugins. Most users are going to usepacker initto install this plugin rather than manually verifying the GPG signature first. - Oxide doesn't publish public GPG keys. If we signed releases with GPG keys we'd have to host the public GPG key somewhere. One thought was to include the public key in this GitHub repository but then both releases and the GPG public key would be hosted on GitHub, reducing the security model to GitHub's TLS.
To be clear, we're not opposed to GPG signing releases. It's just not something that's worth doing until it can be done well.
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Review the current release process and the packer init plugin installation path described in the issue. Determine whether release signatures can be verified securely and where public GPG keys would be hosted; the work is done only when both signing and verification have a clear, secure approach.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- go
- Domain
- release, security
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100