summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/test/integration/test-releasefile-date-older
Commit message (Collapse)AuthorAgeFilesLines
* tests: allow to disable generation of InRelease/Release.gpg fileDavid Kalnischkies2016-05-041-5/+8
| | | | | | | If the test just signs release files to throw away one of them to test the other, we can just as well save the time and not create it. Git-Dch: Ignore
* only warn about missing/invalid Date field for nowDavid Kalnischkies2016-01-271-0/+39
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | The Date field in the Release file is useful to avoid allowing an attacker to 'downgrade' a user to earlier Release files (and hence to older states of the archieve with open security bugs). It is also needed to allow a user to define min/max values for the validation of a Release file (with or without the Release file providing a Valid-Until field). APT wasn't formally requiring this field before through and (agrueable not binding and still incomplete) online documentation declares it optional (until now), so we downgrade the error to a warning for now to give repository creators a bit more time to adapt – the bigger ones should have a Date field for years already, so the effected group should be small in any case. It should be noted that earlier apt versions had this as an error already, but only showed it if a Valid-Until field was present (or the user tried to used the configuration items for min/max valid-until). Closes: 809329
* tests: support spaces in path and TMPDIRDavid Kalnischkies2015-12-191-2/+2
| | | | | | | This doesn't allow all tests to run cleanly, but it at least allows to write tests which could run successfully in such environments. Git-Dch: Ignore
* treat older Release files than we already have as an IMSHitDavid Kalnischkies2015-05-181-0/+62
Valid-Until protects us from long-living downgrade attacks, but not all repositories have it and an attacker could still use older but still valid files to downgrade us. While this makes it sounds like a security improvement now, its a bit theoretical at best as an attacker with capabilities to pull this off could just as well always keep us days (but in the valid period) behind and always knows which state we have, as we tell him with the If-Modified-Since header. This is also why this is 'silently' ignored and treated as an IMSHit rather than screamed at the user as this can at best be an annoyance for attackers. An error here would 'regularily' be encountered by users by out-of-sync mirrors serving a single run (e.g. load balancer) or in two consecutive runs on the other hand, so it would just help teaching people ignore it. That said, most of the code churn is caused by enforcing this additional requirement. Crisscross from InRelease to Release.gpg is e.g. very unlikely in practice, but if we would ignore it an attacker could sidestep it this way.