+1 (binding) I have checked: - The signature (from Zhaofeng Chen) and hashes are correct. - I'm able to build from source and all tests passed.
On 2025/06/20 13:54:12 Zhaofeng Chen wrote: > Hi, > > The KEYS file and .asc signature have been updated. As the original release > artifacts remain unchanged, this vote can continue without restarting. > > Please feel free to proceed with your verification. > > Best regards, > Zhaofeng > > On Thu, Jun 19, 2025 at 1:57 PM Xuanwo <xua...@apache.org> wrote: > > > Thank you for this change. I don't have other questions and will continue > > the verify after your updates. > > > > On Thu, Jun 19, 2025, at 13:55, Zhaofeng Chen wrote: > > > Hi Xuanwo, > > > > > > Thanks for raising these excellent points — we really appreciate the > > > thoughtful feedback. > > > > > > - Who will pay for the hardware? > > > The PMC member who physically maintains the hardware-backed key > > (e.g., a > > > YubiKey) covers the cost themselves. > > > > > > - Will all PMC members receive this hardware? > > > No. Our intention isn’t to distribute hardware to every PMC member, but > > > rather to offer an optional, secure signing path. Access to the > > > hardware-backed key is permissioned, and signing operations are handled > > > through an offline, controlled process. This setup doesn’t restrict > > others > > > from managing releases — it’s just one way to offload key management for > > > those who prefer it. > > > > > > - Can PMC members who do not have this hardware still sign releases? > > > Yes, absolutely. This setup is complementary, not a replacement. PMC > > > members can still sign releases using their own GPG keys, as per standard > > > ASF policy. The shared signing workflow is only intended to reduce the > > > operational burden for those who want stronger security without > > maintaining > > > their own key infrastructure. > > > > > > Ultimately, I hope we can make the release process both easier and more > > > secure, and potentially encourage more contributors to serve as Release > > > Managers. > > > However, after another round of reviewing ASF’s release signing > > > guidelines[1], I realized that our idea shares similarities with Apache’s > > > automated signing infrastructure, which is maintained by the Infra team. > > In > > > particular, it supports: > > > - Centralized signing keys managed securely by Infra > > > - CI-based artifact generation, reproducibility, and offline verification > > > - Strong separation between signing infrastructure and project > > maintainers > > > > > > This might be a promising long-term direction for us. In the future, we > > > could explore working with Infra to request a project-specific signing > > key. > > > > > > [1] > > https://infra.apache.org/release-signing.html#automated-release-signing > > > > > > To avoid any potential confusion for this release, I will revert to the > > > standard model and proceed with signing the artifacts using my personal > > GPG > > > key, which will be added to the KEYS file accordingly. Since the original > > > release artifacts remain unchanged, and only the .asc signature file will > > > be updated, I plan to reuse this vote thread for continuity. > > > > > > Any feedback is greatly appreciated. > > > > > > Best, > > > Zhaofeng > > > > > > On Thu, Jun 19, 2025 at 1:14 PM Xuanwo <xua...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > >> Thank you Zhaofeng for the explanation. > > >> > > >> > We understand that the current key name may be confusing. To make its > > >> > shared nature clearer, we plan to introduce a new key entry with > > identity > > >> > set to something like "Teaclave Release Signing Key", which makes it > > more > > >> > reasonable for people who are trying to verify the artifacts. > > >> > > >> This looks good to me. > > >> > > >> > In the new setup, the shared GPG key is hardware-backed (e.g., > > YubiKey), > > >> > PIN-protected, with expiration date, and maintained by a small group > > of > > >> > administrators. > > >> > > >> This can sometimes be challenging, as it may restrict some PMC members > > >> from making releases. I know that's not your intention, but it can give > > the > > >> impression that the project is controlled by a small group of people. > > >> > > >> Here are some questions: > > >> > > >> - Who will pay for the hardware? > > >> - Will all PMC members receive this hardware? > > >> - Can PMC members who do not have this hardware still sign releases? > > >> > > >> However, this isn't a blocker for the release. We can address these > > issues > > >> gradually. > > >> > > >> On Thu, Jun 19, 2025, at 13:08, Zhaofeng Chen wrote: > > >> > Hi Xuanwo, > > >> > > > >> > Thanks for the helpful input. > > >> > > > >> > - We’ll update future emails to use the official CDN link: > > >> > https://downloads.apache.org/incubator/teaclave/KEYS . For > > verification > > >> > purpose, the file content is identical. > > >> > > > >> > Regarding the signing key: > > >> > We’re moving toward a model where multiple release managers can > > securely > > >> > use the same high-assurance signing key. Previously, each release > > manager > > >> > generated and managed their own GPG key independently, which led to > > >> > inconsistent security practices and made key rotation more difficult. > > >> > > > >> > In the new setup, the shared GPG key is hardware-backed (e.g., > > YubiKey), > > >> > PIN-protected, with expiration date, and maintained by a small group > > of > > >> > administrators. Release managers don’t personally own the key but can > > >> > request access to perform signing operations in a controlled, offline > > >> > process. This approach improves key protection, simplifies key > > lifecycle > > >> > management, and ensures better privilege separation. > > >> > > > >> > We understand that the current key name may be confusing. To make its > > >> > shared nature clearer, we plan to introduce a new key entry with > > identity > > >> > set to something like "Teaclave Release Signing Key", which makes it > > more > > >> > reasonable for people who are trying to verify the artifacts. > > >> > > > >> > I'd love to hear any feedback the community may have on this plan. If > > it > > >> > sounds reasonable and compliant with Apache's policy, I can proceed > > with > > >> > updating the KEYS file with the new key name and the corresponding > > >> > signature files. > > >> > > > >> > Best, > > >> > Zhaofeng > > >> > > > >> > On Thu, Jun 19, 2025 at 10:53 AM Xuanwo <xua...@apache.org> wrote: > > >> > > > >> >> Hi, Zhaofeng > > >> >> > > >> >> Thank you for working on this release. This is my first time > > reviewing > > >> >> releases, so please let me know if there's any context I should be > > >> aware of > > >> >> beforehand. > > >> >> > > >> >> Here are some questsions I have: > > >> >> > > >> >> - It's better to use our CDN for the GPG key download URL: > > >> >> https://downloads.apache.org/incubator/teaclave/KEYS > > >> >> - I noticed that the release is signed by a different key, > > >> >> yu...@apache.org, which does not belong to Zhaofeng. Is it signed > > >> >> automatically in CI? > > >> >> > > >> >> On Thu, Jun 19, 2025, at 08:03, Zhaofeng Chen wrote: > > >> >> > Hi all, > > >> >> > > > >> >> > I am pleased to be calling this vote for the release of Apache > > >> Teaclave > > >> >> > TrustZone SDK (incubating) 0.5.0 (release candidate 1). > > >> >> > > > >> >> > Although this release follows shortly after the approval of the > > >> v0.4.0 on > > >> >> > June 3, please note that the earlier release was initiated back on > > >> >> February > > >> >> > 27 and was significantly delayed due to a prolonged voting process. > > >> Since > > >> >> > then, we’ve made improvements to streamline the process and hope > > this > > >> >> > release proceeds more smoothly. > > >> >> > > > >> >> > The release note is available in: > > >> >> > - > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > >> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-teaclave-trustzone-sdk/releases/tag/v0.5.0-rc.1 > > >> >> > > > >> >> > The release candidate to be voted over is available at: > > >> >> > - > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > >> > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/teaclave/trustzone-sdk-0.5.0-rc.1/ > > >> >> > > > >> >> > The release candidate is signed with a GPG key available at: > > >> >> > - > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/incubator/teaclave/KEYS > > >> >> > > > >> >> > Instructions to verify the release candidate’s signature: > > >> >> > - > > >> >> > > https://teaclave.apache.org/download/#verify-the-integrity-of-the-files > > >> >> > > > >> >> > Incubator release checklist for reference: > > >> >> > - > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > >> > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/INCUBATOR/Incubator+Release+Checklist > > >> >> > > > >> >> > The release artifacts have passed all GitHub Actions CI checks. You > > >> can > > >> >> > also reproduce the build process manually from source using the > > >> >> > following > > >> >> > commands: > > >> >> > ``` > > >> >> > $ wget > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > >> > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/teaclave/trustzone-sdk-0.5.0-rc.1/apache-teaclave-trustzone-sdk-0.5.0-incubating.tar.gz > > >> >> > $ tar zxvf apache-teaclave-trustzone-sdk-0.5.0-incubating.tar.gz > > >> >> > $ cd apache-teaclave-trustzone-sdk-0.5.0-incubating > > >> >> > $ docker run --rm -it -v$(pwd):/teaclave-trustzone-sdk -w \ > > >> >> > /teaclave-trustzone-sdk yuanz0/teaclave-trustzone-sdk:ubuntu-24.04 > > \ > > >> >> > bash -c "./setup.sh && (./build_optee_libraries.sh optee) && > > source \ > > >> >> > environment && make && (cd ci && ./ci.sh)" > > >> >> > ``` > > >> >> > > > >> >> > The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. Anyone can participate > > >> >> > in testing and voting, not just committers, please feel free to try > > >> >> > out the release candidate and provide your votes to this thread > > >> >> > explicitly. > > >> >> > > > >> >> > [ ] +1 approve > > >> >> > [ ] +0 no opinion > > >> >> > [ ] -1 disapprove with the reason > > >> >> > > > >> >> > Best, > > >> >> > Zhaofeng > > >> >> > > >> >> -- > > >> >> Xuanwo > > >> >> > > >> >> https://xuanwo.io/ > > >> >> > > >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > >> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@teaclave.apache.org > > >> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@teaclave.apache.org > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> > > >> -- > > >> Xuanwo > > >> > > >> https://xuanwo.io/ > > >> > > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@teaclave.apache.org > > >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@teaclave.apache.org > > >> > > >> > > > > -- > > Xuanwo > > > > https://xuanwo.io/ > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@teaclave.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@teaclave.apache.org > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@teaclave.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@teaclave.apache.org
