On Fri, Aug 05, 2011 at 12:32:17PM +0200, Michael Vogt wrote: > On Tue, Aug 02, 2011 at 04:14:18AM -0400, Hamish Moffatt wrote: > > Package: apt > > Version: 0.8.10.3+squeeze1 > > Severity: important > > Thanks for your bugreport. > > > I have a test repository containing a Packages.bz2 file with different > > checksums than what is listed in the signed Release file. However, > > 'apt-get update' does not report any error and shows the resulting > > packages in the output of 'apt-cache policy'. > > > > This occurs when accessing the repository with http. I think I have seen > > errors reported when using file:/ urls (and uncompressed Packages) files > > but I am not certain now. > > > > I've attached a test repository; it's not signed, but I've tried with > > signed repositories too. eg rsync dists/squeeze from a Debian mirror > > then mess with main/binary-i386/Packages.bz2 > > I can verify this for unsigned Release files, there is indeed no > hashsum verification in this case. I added a testcase and a fix to the > debian-sid branch. But I was not able to verify this for signed > Release files, I get correct errors in this case on apt-get update on > mismaches (I added a test for this as well to the testsuite to be > sure).
Thanks. By the way I found this problem in lucid originally and verified on squeeze before reporting it there. However I am seeing the problem with what I believe is a correctly signed repository. For example the repository inside the tar I attached to the original report. I think the key for it is on keyserver.ubuntu.com. As a second dist, I copied down dists/ from a debian mirror, repacked a Packages.bz2 for main/binary-i386 to ensure the md5sum changed, then ran apt-get update against it. There was no error and apt-cache policy showed that apt considered the source valid. Hamish -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org