Skip to content

Conversation

@ralphbean
Copy link
Contributor

This helps with more confident identification of an rpm.

In theory, two rpms can be built that have the same purl string, and otherwise look identical in syft's output, but the PGP information would distinguish them as signed either by different keys, or signed at different times.

In practice, this usually makes no difference since rpms tend to have unique name/version/release strings. This gives increased confidence about the identity of the rpm found in the db.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the json-schema Changes the json schema label Aug 30, 2024
@ralphbean ralphbean marked this pull request as draft August 30, 2024 19:25
@ralphbean
Copy link
Contributor Author

I still need to get some signature information into the tests before this is ready for review.

This helps with more confident identification of an rpm.

In theory, two rpms can be built that have the same purl string, and
otherwise look identical in syft's output, but the PGP information
would distinguish them as signed either by different keys, or signed at
different times.

In practice, this usually makes no difference since rpms tend to have
unique name/version/release strings. This just gives increased
confidence about the identity of the rpm found in the db.

Signed-off-by: Ralph Bean <rbean@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Ralph Bean <rbean@redhat.com>
@ralphbean
Copy link
Contributor Author

(I spent some time trying to get the test suite working locally on main branch, but have so far failed. Just FYI, I'm not totally ignoring this.)

@wagoodman
Copy link
Contributor

no problem @ralphbean -- shout out if there is something we can do to help!

wagoodman added 2 commits May 8, 2025 15:58
Signed-off-by: Alex Goodman <wagoodman@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: Alex Goodman <wagoodman@users.noreply.github.com>
@wagoodman
Copy link
Contributor

The upstream lib doesn't seem to be working when the backing store is sqlite (where it is working when it's bdb)

Screenshot 2025-05-08 at 4 24 53 PM

Technically that doesn't affect the functionality, but it does make generating a test case a little harder. I might poke upstream to see what's going on.

Signed-off-by: Alex Goodman <wagoodman@users.noreply.github.com>
@wagoodman
Copy link
Contributor

wagoodman commented May 12, 2025

I've got a fix upstream for this knqyf263/go-rpmdb#58, which would populate a new RSAHeader field. Pushing the code change that requires this (so everythin should fail) but once merged upstream we can update this branch to use the released code then rerun.

Signed-off-by: Alex Goodman <wagoodman@users.noreply.github.com>
@wagoodman wagoodman self-assigned this May 12, 2025
@wagoodman wagoodman added this to OSS May 12, 2025
@wagoodman wagoodman moved this to In Progress in OSS May 12, 2025
wagoodman added 3 commits May 15, 2025 09:12
Signed-off-by: Alex Goodman <wagoodman@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: Alex Goodman <wagoodman@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: Alex Goodman <wagoodman@users.noreply.github.com>
@wagoodman
Copy link
Contributor

We don't have to wait for upstream to merge this -- we'll use the fork for now and when merged, switch to using upstream again.

@wagoodman wagoodman marked this pull request as ready for review May 15, 2025 13:16
Signed-off-by: Alex Goodman <wagoodman@users.noreply.github.com>
@wagoodman wagoodman changed the title feat: expose rpm signature information Expose rpm signature information (for RPM DB and RPM archives) May 15, 2025
@wagoodman wagoodman moved this from In Progress to In Review in OSS May 15, 2025
Signed-off-by: Alex Goodman <wagoodman@users.noreply.github.com>
@wagoodman wagoodman changed the title Expose rpm signature information (for RPM DB and RPM archives) Expose RPM signature information (for RPM DB and RPM archives) May 15, 2025
Signed-off-by: Alex Goodman <wagoodman@users.noreply.github.com>
@wagoodman wagoodman enabled auto-merge (squash) May 15, 2025 15:49
@wagoodman wagoodman merged commit b369b02 into anchore:main May 15, 2025
13 checks passed
@github-project-automation github-project-automation bot moved this from In Review to Done in OSS May 15, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

json-schema Changes the json schema

Projects

Archived in project

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants