You can subscribe to this list here.
2013 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
(221) |
Apr
(14) |
May
(49) |
Jun
(9) |
Jul
(51) |
Aug
(15) |
Sep
(28) |
Oct
(2) |
Nov
(10) |
Dec
(5) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2014 |
Jan
(49) |
Feb
(8) |
Mar
(10) |
Apr
(7) |
May
(1) |
Jun
(2) |
Jul
(9) |
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
(4) |
Nov
(4) |
Dec
(1) |
2015 |
Jan
(8) |
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
(8) |
Sep
(1) |
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
(8) |
2016 |
Jan
|
Feb
(10) |
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
(3) |
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
(6) |
Oct
(8) |
Nov
|
Dec
|
2017 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
(4) |
May
(2) |
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
2018 |
Jan
|
Feb
(5) |
Mar
(6) |
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
(2) |
Oct
(1) |
Nov
(17) |
Dec
(11) |
2019 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
(2) |
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
(1) |
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
(1) |
Oct
(1) |
Nov
|
Dec
|
2020 |
Jan
|
Feb
(15) |
Mar
|
Apr
(2) |
May
(2) |
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
(1) |
Sep
|
Oct
(1) |
Nov
(6) |
Dec
|
2021 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
(1) |
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
(2) |
Oct
|
Nov
(3) |
Dec
(16) |
2022 |
Jan
|
Feb
(6) |
Mar
(6) |
Apr
|
May
(2) |
Jun
(1) |
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
(1) |
Oct
|
Nov
(1) |
Dec
|
2023 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
(13) |
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
2024 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
(1) |
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
From: Rick M. <k1...@ar...> - 2024-03-15 02:04:58
|
I'm preparing to release a new version of TQSL. The primary change here is to clean up TQSL's display of callsign certificates (removing the 'awaiting ARRL' message), detect attempts to install old (expired, replaced) TQ6 files, while pointing users to how to get their current callsign certificate from Logbook. TQSL also tries to detect cases where the user's date is set wrong and provide guidance. There's a minor change to allow a user to export callsign certificates using weak, obsolete cryptographic algorithms necessary to allow import into the Apple keyring, https://www.rickmurphy.net/lotw/tqsl-2.7.3.msi Windows https://www.rickmurphy.net/lotw/tqsl-2.7.3.pkg Mac https://www.rickmurphy.net/lotw/tqsl-2.7.3.tar.gz Unix/Linux https://www.rickmurphy.net/lotw/tqsl-legacy-2.7.3.pkg Mac, 32-bit Please give this a spin. Any input is welcome! 73, -Rick -- Rick Murphy, D.Sc., CISSP-ISSAP, K1MU/4, Annandale VA USA |
From: Richard S. <hob...@gm...> - 2023-09-18 23:03:24
|
On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 6:33 AM Rick Murphy <k1m...@gm...> wrote: > The cause here is that the data being returned by the upload database > query is getting overwritten by sqlite so TQSL sees random garbage. > Fixed by making a copy of the data and managing release of that so it > sticks around until I need it. > Since you're building from source, patch attached. This will of course be > fixed in the release candidate, > > Thanks for discovering this! > I can confirm it works for me. Thanks! Richard KF5OIM |
From: Rick M. <k1m...@gm...> - 2023-09-18 11:33:12
|
The cause here is that the data being returned by the upload database query is getting overwritten by sqlite so TQSL sees random garbage. Fixed by making a copy of the data and managing release of that so it sticks around until I need it. Since you're building from source, patch attached. This will of course be fixed in the release candidate, Thanks for discovering this! 73, -Rick On Sun, Sep 17, 2023 at 10:36 PM Rick Murphy <k1m...@gm...> wrote: > On Sun, Sep 17, 2023 at 10:14 PM Richard Shaw <hob...@gm...> > wrote: > >> On Sun, Sep 17, 2023 at 8:10 AM Rick Murphy <k1m...@gm...> >> wrote: >> >>> I'd have a look at your upload logs on Logbook - are you seeing >>> previously uploaded QSOs showing up? >>> >> >> I didn't see any duplicates or anything >> > > Then nothing got re-uploaded. Seems strange. But - see below. There is > something wrong here. > > >> ... >> >>> What platform are you using? >>> >> >> Fedora Linux 38. I've been the package maintainer for several years now. >> > > That makes it easy. I develop on Fedora and move to the other platforms. > Currently I'm running F38. > I just tried this and saw the same thing: signing a log with mostly > uploaded QSOs and they just went through. > I'll dig in as to why - this isn't intended. > 73, > -Rick > -- > Rick Murphy, D. Sc., CISSP-ISSAP, K1MU/4, Annandale VA USA > -- Rick Murphy, D. Sc., CISSP-ISSAP, K1MU/4, Annandale VA USA |
From: Rick M. <k1m...@gm...> - 2023-09-18 02:37:06
|
On Sun, Sep 17, 2023 at 10:14 PM Richard Shaw <hob...@gm...> wrote: > On Sun, Sep 17, 2023 at 8:10 AM Rick Murphy <k1m...@gm...> wrote: > >> I'd have a look at your upload logs on Logbook - are you seeing >> previously uploaded QSOs showing up? >> > > I didn't see any duplicates or anything > Then nothing got re-uploaded. Seems strange. But - see below. There is something wrong here. > ... > >> What platform are you using? >> > > Fedora Linux 38. I've been the package maintainer for several years now. > That makes it easy. I develop on Fedora and move to the other platforms. Currently I'm running F38. I just tried this and saw the same thing: signing a log with mostly uploaded QSOs and they just went through. I'll dig in as to why - this isn't intended. 73, -Rick -- Rick Murphy, D. Sc., CISSP-ISSAP, K1MU/4, Annandale VA USA |
From: Richard S. <hob...@gm...> - 2023-09-18 02:10:11
|
On Sun, Sep 17, 2023 at 8:10 AM Rick Murphy <k1m...@gm...> wrote: > I'd have a look at your upload logs on Logbook - are you seeing previously > uploaded QSOs showing up? > I didn't see any duplicates or anything > Note that this practice - upload everything and let the software filter > the new ones - is strongly discouraged. > Hence my concern, it's always filtered the duplicates before now. > The upload data kept by TQSL is per-computer so QSOs uploaded from one > computer won't be recorded on any others (unless you backup the first and > restore the TBK to the others.) > I only keep a log on my desktop. If I do happen to work from my laptop I copy the ADIF files over. What platform are you using? > Fedora Linux 38. I've been the package maintainer for several years now. Thanks, Richard KF5OIM |
From: Rick M. <k1m...@gm...> - 2023-09-17 13:10:16
|
I'd have a look at your upload logs on Logbook - are you seeing previously uploaded QSOs showing up? Note that this practice - upload everything and let the software filter the new ones - is strongly discouraged. The upload data kept by TQSL is per-computer so QSOs uploaded from one computer won't be recorded on any others (unless you backup the first and restore the TBK to the others.) What platform are you using? 73, -Rick On Sun, Sep 17, 2023 at 8:31 AM Richard Shaw <hob...@gm...> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 2:15 PM Rick Murphy <k1m...@gm...> wrote: > >> I've just tried this and got the expected "This log contains x QSO(s) >> which appear to have already been signed for upload to LoTW.." dialog. >> 73 >> > > Interesting, I tried a second time and for me it was the same as the > first, no prompt... > > Thanks, > Richard > KF5OIM > _______________________________________________ > Trustedqsl-testing mailing list > Tru...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/trustedqsl-testing > -- Rick Murphy, D. Sc., CISSP-ISSAP, K1MU/4, Annandale VA USA |
From: Richard S. <hob...@gm...> - 2023-09-17 12:27:46
|
On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 2:15 PM Rick Murphy <k1m...@gm...> wrote: > I've just tried this and got the expected "This log contains x QSO(s) > which appear to have already been signed for upload to LoTW.." dialog. > 73 > Interesting, I tried a second time and for me it was the same as the first, no prompt... Thanks, Richard KF5OIM |
From: Rick M. <k1m...@gm...> - 2023-09-12 19:15:24
|
I've just tried this and got the expected "This log contains x QSO(s) which appear to have already been signed for upload to LoTW.." dialog. 73, -Rick On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 8:33 AM Rick Murphy <k1m...@gm...> wrote: > Thanks. I'll have a look. > 73, > -Rick > > On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 7:45 AM Richard Shaw <hob...@gm...> wrote: > >> On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 6:44 AM Richard Shaw <hob...@gm...> >> wrote: >> >>> On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 10:18 PM Rick Murphy <k1m...@gm...> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> The first time you run v2.7 it's going to discard the uploaded QSO >>>> history. >>>> If you have an automatic backup enabled (File/Display or Modify >>>> Preferences) and a good backup exists, then that data should be restored. >>>> Is that consistent, or is there something else going on that I need to >>>> investigate? >>>> >>> >>> Maybe I didn't explain it very quickly. Just as a test of the new >>> version I did the usual first option in TQSL, sign and upload. >>> >> >> correctly... Sorry still working on coffee #1 this morning. >> >>> >>> On one of the pop-ups it asks for a date range to include which I never >>> use. Once I click OK previously it would tell me I have XXX number of >>> duplicates and XXX new contacts but this did not happen. >>> >>> Logging into the site I don't see duplicates or anything I just didn't >>> know if it automatically skipped duplicates or re-processed all of my >>> contacts. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Richard >>> KF5OIM >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Trustedqsl-testing mailing list >> Tru...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/trustedqsl-testing >> > > > -- > Rick Murphy, D. Sc., CISSP-ISSAP, K1MU/4, Annandale VA USA > -- Rick Murphy, D. Sc., CISSP-ISSAP, K1MU/4, Annandale VA USA |
From: Rick M. <k1m...@gm...> - 2023-09-12 12:33:36
|
Thanks. I'll have a look. 73, -Rick On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 7:45 AM Richard Shaw <hob...@gm...> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 6:44 AM Richard Shaw <hob...@gm...> wrote: > >> On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 10:18 PM Rick Murphy <k1m...@gm...> >> wrote: >> >>> The first time you run v2.7 it's going to discard the uploaded QSO >>> history. >>> If you have an automatic backup enabled (File/Display or Modify >>> Preferences) and a good backup exists, then that data should be restored. >>> Is that consistent, or is there something else going on that I need to >>> investigate? >>> >> >> Maybe I didn't explain it very quickly. Just as a test of the new version >> I did the usual first option in TQSL, sign and upload. >> > > correctly... Sorry still working on coffee #1 this morning. > >> >> On one of the pop-ups it asks for a date range to include which I never >> use. Once I click OK previously it would tell me I have XXX number of >> duplicates and XXX new contacts but this did not happen. >> >> Logging into the site I don't see duplicates or anything I just didn't >> know if it automatically skipped duplicates or re-processed all of my >> contacts. >> >> Thanks, >> Richard >> KF5OIM >> > _______________________________________________ > Trustedqsl-testing mailing list > Tru...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/trustedqsl-testing > -- Rick Murphy, D. Sc., CISSP-ISSAP, K1MU/4, Annandale VA USA |
From: Richard S. <hob...@gm...> - 2023-09-12 11:45:01
|
On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 6:44 AM Richard Shaw <hob...@gm...> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 10:18 PM Rick Murphy <k1m...@gm...> > wrote: > >> The first time you run v2.7 it's going to discard the uploaded QSO >> history. >> If you have an automatic backup enabled (File/Display or Modify >> Preferences) and a good backup exists, then that data should be restored. >> Is that consistent, or is there something else going on that I need to >> investigate? >> > > Maybe I didn't explain it very quickly. Just as a test of the new version > I did the usual first option in TQSL, sign and upload. > correctly... Sorry still working on coffee #1 this morning. > > On one of the pop-ups it asks for a date range to include which I never > use. Once I click OK previously it would tell me I have XXX number of > duplicates and XXX new contacts but this did not happen. > > Logging into the site I don't see duplicates or anything I just didn't > know if it automatically skipped duplicates or re-processed all of my > contacts. > > Thanks, > Richard > KF5OIM > |
From: Richard S. <hob...@gm...> - 2023-09-12 11:44:30
|
On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 10:18 PM Rick Murphy <k1m...@gm...> wrote: > The first time you run v2.7 it's going to discard the uploaded QSO history. > If you have an automatic backup enabled (File/Display or Modify > Preferences) and a good backup exists, then that data should be restored. > Is that consistent, or is there something else going on that I need to > investigate? > Maybe I didn't explain it very quickly. Just as a test of the new version I did the usual first option in TQSL, sign and upload. On one of the pop-ups it asks for a date range to include which I never use. Once I click OK previously it would tell me I have XXX number of duplicates and XXX new contacts but this did not happen. Logging into the site I don't see duplicates or anything I just didn't know if it automatically skipped duplicates or re-processed all of my contacts. Thanks, Richard KF5OIM |
From: Rick M. <k1m...@gm...> - 2023-09-12 03:18:05
|
The first time you run v2.7 it's going to discard the uploaded QSO history. If you have an automatic backup enabled (File/Display or Modify Preferences) and a good backup exists, then that data should be restored. Is that consistent, or is there something else going on that I need to investigate? 73, -Rick On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 10:29 PM Richard Shaw <hob...@gm...> wrote: > I built a test package for Fedora and was able to upload my WSJT-X > contacts. > > I noticed that usually I just upload everything and let it remove the > duplicates for me. In this case it did not ask. Is that expected? > > Thanks, > Richard > KF5OIM > _______________________________________________ > Trustedqsl-testing mailing list > Tru...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/trustedqsl-testing > -- Rick Murphy, D. Sc., CISSP-ISSAP, K1MU/4, Annandale VA USA |
From: Richard S. <hob...@gm...> - 2023-09-12 02:26:22
|
I built a test package for Fedora and was able to upload my WSJT-X contacts. I noticed that usually I just upload everything and let it remove the duplicates for me. In this case it did not ask. Is that expected? Thanks, Richard KF5OIM |
From: Rick M. <k1...@ar...> - 2023-09-12 00:29:13
|
I've been putting off release of 2.7 but there's now enough changes to push this over the wall. 2.7beta2 has several improvements; - The uploads database is updated from Oracle' Berkeley DB because the Oracle database is simply unusable, repeatedly corrupting the database for no reason. Since Oracle's database is fragile and breaks a lot, I've replaced the uploads database with SQLite. Hopefully this will eliminate the frequent database corruption. - Fixes for 1x1 callsign handling to stop validating against the FCC ULS database when an end-date is provided. - Allow OPERATOR in ADIF files to be longer than a normal callsign. If the OPERATOR is incorrectly set to the name of the operator, then it's not a callsign and will be ignored. - Update portable callsign handling. This now allows prefix/call like MU/K1MU and handles it properly. - Add a preference to allow callsigns in ADIF files to be ignored when signing. - Fix portable call handling for non-US stations "P5ROMEO/W4" used to require a US base call. - Restore the uploaded QSO database from the last backup when it gets corrupted. The other major change here is to build a "flatpak" image for Linux distributions. This allows install on most 64-bit Linux systems with no compiling needed. I just installed the latest Flatpak build on a Chromebook and a Raspberry Pi - easy peasy, Mac 64-bit builds now work on Apple Silicon (M1/M2 currently) systems. Mac 32-bit builds work on PPC and Intel i386. (Is anyone actually using the 32-bit Mac builds?) Kits: Windows: https://www.rickmurphy.net/lotw/tqsl-2.7.msi Mac, 64-bit: https://www.rickmurphy.net/tqsl-2.7.pkg Mac, 32-bit: https://www.rickmuphy.net/tqsl/tqsl-legacy-2.7.pkg Unix source: https://www.rickmurphy.net/tqsl/tqsl-2.7.tar.gz Linux Flatpak: https://flathub.org/apps/org.arrl.trustedqsl I'm very interested in upload testing due to the uploads database changes, and feedback on the Flatpak builds for Linux as that took a lot of work to get accepted in their repository. 73, -Rick -- Rick Murphy, D.Sc., CISSP-ISSAP, K1MU/4, Annandale VA USA |
From: Rick M. <k1...@ar...> - 2022-11-15 16:05:47
|
A new release of TQSL (2.7) is in progress. Beta versions of this release are now available for testing; these have all of the major changes expected for 2.7. Changes: 1. When the "uploads" database gets corrupted or is missing, try to recover it from a backup. In the past, TQSL would start over with an empty database, losing all upload history. The fact that TQSL by default performs an automatic backup when it's run means that a good source of upload data is often available. 2. Change the upload database from Oracle BerkeleyDB (BDB) to Lightning Memory-Mapped Database (LMDB). This removes a source of frequent errors because that database was getting corrupted, with many attempts to repair/recover by TQSL not working as hoped. LMDB has higher performance and does not have the licensing issues found with BDB. 3. Upgrade the Mac kits to support native Apple Silicon (arm64) and Intel 64-bit; the legacy kit is now only for 32-bit Intel and PowerPC. Some components of TQSL are lagging behind with this release as they will not build on these older systems. Input on the value of continuing to maintain the 32-bit Mac systems is of value. Please give these a spin. All feedback is gratefully accepted. This will go to a release candidate once the translator updates are completed, which probably means early December. Kits: https://www.rickmurphy.net/lotw/tqsl-2.7.msi - Windows https://www.rickmurphy.net/lotw/tqsl-2.7.pkg - Mac 64-bit https://www.rickmurphy.net/lotw/tqsl-legacy-2.7.pkg - Mac 32-bit https://www.rickmurphy.net/lotw/tqsl-2.7.tar.gz - Linux/BSD source https:/www.rickmurphy.net/lotw/tqsl-2.7_x86_64.AppImage - Linux pre-built 73, -Rick -- Rick Murphy, D.Sc., CISSP-ISSAP, K1MU/4, Annandale VA USA |
From: Björn E. <bj...@ek...> - 2022-09-12 21:40:06
|
Was the public release of 2.6.5 rc4 really intentional? Wouldn't it be better to wait until there is a final one? Now TQSL tells you there is a new release over and over and over again... Björn SM7IUN |
From: Björn E. <bj...@ek...> - 2022-06-04 06:05:29
|
Thanks. That is what I did. Björn SM7IUN Den ons 1 juni 2022 kl 00:47 skrev Rick Murphy <k1...@ar...>: > Yes, this has already been reported by the Ubuntu maintainers. > Fix is queued for TQSL 2.6.4. In the meantime, say "no" to that prompt, > then renew by right clicking on the callsign certificate. > 73, > -Rick > > On Tue, May 31, 2022 at 5:24 PM Björn Ekelund <bj...@ek...> wrote: > >> I upgraded to 2.6.3 earlier today. When I click Help->Search for updates >> it tells me TQSL is up to date but then I (correctly) >> get a prompt about one of my certificates expiring. When answering yes to >> the question if I want to renew, TQSL crashes. >> >> Is this reproducible? I'm hesitant to sharing my certificates. >> >> Björn >> _______________________________________________ >> Trustedqsl-testing mailing list >> Tru...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/trustedqsl-testing >> > > > -- > Rick Murphy, D.Sc., CISSP-ISSAP, K1MU/4, Annandale VA USA > _______________________________________________ > Trustedqsl-testing mailing list > Tru...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/trustedqsl-testing > |
From: Rick M. <k1...@ar...> - 2022-05-31 22:47:21
|
Yes, this has already been reported by the Ubuntu maintainers. Fix is queued for TQSL 2.6.4. In the meantime, say "no" to that prompt, then renew by right clicking on the callsign certificate. 73, -Rick On Tue, May 31, 2022 at 5:24 PM Björn Ekelund <bj...@ek...> wrote: > I upgraded to 2.6.3 earlier today. When I click Help->Search for updates > it tells me TQSL is up to date but then I (correctly) > get a prompt about one of my certificates expiring. When answering yes to > the question if I want to renew, TQSL crashes. > > Is this reproducible? I'm hesitant to sharing my certificates. > > Björn > _______________________________________________ > Trustedqsl-testing mailing list > Tru...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/trustedqsl-testing > -- Rick Murphy, D.Sc., CISSP-ISSAP, K1MU/4, Annandale VA USA |
From: Björn E. <bj...@ek...> - 2022-05-31 21:23:48
|
I upgraded to 2.6.3 earlier today. When I click Help->Search for updates it tells me TQSL is up to date but then I (correctly) get a prompt about one of my certificates expiring. When answering yes to the question if I want to renew, TQSL crashes. Is this reproducible? I'm hesitant to sharing my certificates. Björn |
From: Björn E. <bj...@ek...> - 2022-03-10 10:10:10
|
The cybersecurity community deemed SHA-1 too insecure for any serious use already in 2005. Björn Den ons 9 mars 2022 kl 18:34 skrev Greg Troxel <gd...@le...>: > > Richard Shaw <hob...@gm...> writes: > > > On Wed, Mar 9, 2022 at 8:01 AM Greg Troxel <gd...@le...> wrote: > > > >> > >> Richard Shaw <hob...@gm...> writes: > >> > >> > Just a heads up, but Fedora Linux is considering dropping SHA-1 > support > >> > since it's no longer considered secure. I can't remember what TQSL > uses > >> so > >> > wanted to check her if TQSL would be impacted. > >> > >> Do you mean "remove support for SHA-1 from the system"? That seems > >> extreme and likely to cause a huge amount of trouble. What's the story > >> about git? > >> > >> If you mean "encorage use of SHA2 and others instead for most uses, and > >> require it for validating packages", that's something else. > > > > Here's the link to the thread. It's probably better to read it there than > > for me to try and paraphrase. I'm certainly not an encryption expert by > any > > means. > > > > > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/de...@li.../thread/VVLHQAWI3IQ7NRLKMUHJ27JV3V2JAFDP/ > > Thanks. It looks like it means withdraw SHA-1 from openssl. Wow. > > Here's the key quote: > > Fedora is a large distribution with short release cycles, and the only > realistic way to weed out its reliance on SHA-1 signatures from all of > its numerous dark corners is to break them. > > _______________________________________________ > Trustedqsl-testing mailing list > Tru...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/trustedqsl-testing > |
From: Rick M. <k1...@ar...> - 2022-03-09 19:05:32
|
TQSL doesn't use SHA-1 (other than potential access to TLS-protected webpages.) TQSL uses MD5 for signing logs and for callsign certificates. Fedora disabled MD5 some time ago, but enabled a bypass - MD5 is enabled if environment variable OPENSSL_ENABLE_MD5_VERIFY is defined. I'm assuming they'll do the same here for SHA-1. So, in short, no impact. Perhaps Logbook needs to upgrade - RSA 1024 / MD5 could upgrade to at least 2048 and SHA-256. And signing update to use SHA-256. Doing that would require changes to both software at Logbook plus TQSL changes to allow two different signing algorithms. Ultimately, it's a question of when we'll be forced to upgrade. 73, -Rick On Wed, Mar 9, 2022 at 12:34 PM Greg Troxel <gd...@le...> wrote: > > Richard Shaw <hob...@gm...> writes: > > > On Wed, Mar 9, 2022 at 8:01 AM Greg Troxel <gd...@le...> wrote: > > > >> > >> Richard Shaw <hob...@gm...> writes: > >> > >> > Just a heads up, but Fedora Linux is considering dropping SHA-1 > support > >> > since it's no longer considered secure. I can't remember what TQSL > uses > >> so > >> > wanted to check her if TQSL would be impacted. > >> > >> Do you mean "remove support for SHA-1 from the system"? That seems > >> extreme and likely to cause a huge amount of trouble. What's the story > >> about git? > >> > >> If you mean "encorage use of SHA2 and others instead for most uses, and > >> require it for validating packages", that's something else. > > > > Here's the link to the thread. It's probably better to read it there than > > for me to try and paraphrase. I'm certainly not an encryption expert by > any > > means. > > > > > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/de...@li.../thread/VVLHQAWI3IQ7NRLKMUHJ27JV3V2JAFDP/ > > Thanks. It looks like it means withdraw SHA-1 from openssl. Wow. > > Here's the key quote: > > Fedora is a large distribution with short release cycles, and the only > realistic way to weed out its reliance on SHA-1 signatures from all of > its numerous dark corners is to break them. > > _______________________________________________ > Trustedqsl-testing mailing list > Tru...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/trustedqsl-testing > -- Rick Murphy, D.Sc., CISSP-ISSAP, K1MU/4, Annandale VA USA |
From: Greg T. <gd...@le...> - 2022-03-09 17:34:28
|
Richard Shaw <hob...@gm...> writes: > On Wed, Mar 9, 2022 at 8:01 AM Greg Troxel <gd...@le...> wrote: > >> >> Richard Shaw <hob...@gm...> writes: >> >> > Just a heads up, but Fedora Linux is considering dropping SHA-1 support >> > since it's no longer considered secure. I can't remember what TQSL uses >> so >> > wanted to check her if TQSL would be impacted. >> >> Do you mean "remove support for SHA-1 from the system"? That seems >> extreme and likely to cause a huge amount of trouble. What's the story >> about git? >> >> If you mean "encorage use of SHA2 and others instead for most uses, and >> require it for validating packages", that's something else. > > Here's the link to the thread. It's probably better to read it there than > for me to try and paraphrase. I'm certainly not an encryption expert by any > means. > > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/de...@li.../thread/VVLHQAWI3IQ7NRLKMUHJ27JV3V2JAFDP/ Thanks. It looks like it means withdraw SHA-1 from openssl. Wow. Here's the key quote: Fedora is a large distribution with short release cycles, and the only realistic way to weed out its reliance on SHA-1 signatures from all of its numerous dark corners is to break them. |
From: Richard S. <hob...@gm...> - 2022-03-09 17:29:13
|
On Wed, Mar 9, 2022 at 8:01 AM Greg Troxel <gd...@le...> wrote: > > Richard Shaw <hob...@gm...> writes: > > > Just a heads up, but Fedora Linux is considering dropping SHA-1 support > > since it's no longer considered secure. I can't remember what TQSL uses > so > > wanted to check her if TQSL would be impacted. > > Do you mean "remove support for SHA-1 from the system"? That seems > extreme and likely to cause a huge amount of trouble. What's the story > about git? > > If you mean "encorage use of SHA2 and others instead for most uses, and > require it for validating packages", that's something else. > Here's the link to the thread. It's probably better to read it there than for me to try and paraphrase. I'm certainly not an encryption expert by any means. https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/de...@li.../thread/VVLHQAWI3IQ7NRLKMUHJ27JV3V2JAFDP/ Thanks, Richard KF5OIM |
From: Greg T. <gd...@le...> - 2022-03-09 14:01:33
|
Richard Shaw <hob...@gm...> writes: > Just a heads up, but Fedora Linux is considering dropping SHA-1 support > since it's no longer considered secure. I can't remember what TQSL uses so > wanted to check her if TQSL would be impacted. Do you mean "remove support for SHA-1 from the system"? That seems extreme and likely to cause a huge amount of trouble. What's the story about git? If you mean "encorage use of SHA2 and others instead for most uses, and require it for validating packages", that's something else. |
From: Richard S. <hob...@gm...> - 2022-03-09 13:51:01
|
Just a heads up, but Fedora Linux is considering dropping SHA-1 support since it's no longer considered secure. I can't remember what TQSL uses so wanted to check her if TQSL would be impacted. Thanks, Richard KF5OIM |