community-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andy Seaborne <>
Subject Re: SHA512 by default for GPG sigs
Date Wed, 18 May 2016 18:52:23 GMT
On 18/05/16 18:58, Greg Trasuk wrote:
> Hi Christopher:
> Thanks for your involvement.  Apache Maven is one of many projects at the Apache Software
Foundation.  Each project has its own mailing lists.  So your discussion should probably go
to, which I’ve cc’d on this response.  If you’re not subscribed
to that list, you probably should do that as well - check the Apache Maven web site (
for more info.
> Thanks again,
> Greg Trasuk

I think Christopher is talking about the Apache POM and effect on ASF 
releases for java-related projects that use org.apache:apache, rather 
than maven development.


>> On May 18, 2016, at 1:45 PM, Christopher <> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> I'm not sure a better list to get feedback on, but I wanted to bring
>> attention to the proposal here:
>> Essentially this is a suggestion to configure the maven-gpg-plugin to sign
>> using SHA512 as its digest algorithm in the ASF Parent POM, used by many
>> Maven/Java-based projects within ASF. This configuration takes affect
>> during software releases when this plugin is activated (typically prior to
>> a release candidate vote, and staging a release in Nexus for distribution
>> to Maven Central).
>> This would only affect the hash algorithm used to generate GPG signatures
>> for releases, and not any separate SHA/MD hashes published separately by
>> any project, which can be weaker (SHA1, MD5) for convenience, and don't
>> convey the strong authenticity statement that digital signatures provide.
>> For background, gpg uses SHA1 by default, unless the signing key or gpg
>> configuration has a preference to use another algorithm (as described on
>> This proposed configuration change wouldn't force the use of SHA512 (it
>> could still be overridden by a project), but it would make it the default,
>> which helps improve the security of releases in the case where release
>> managers have failed to keep their configuration up-to-date with the best
>> recommendations for using gpg.
>> Thoughts? +1s? Discuss here or on the JIRA please.
>> Thank you.

View raw message