From nobody Sun Apr 02 16:49:30 2023 X-Original-To: questions@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4PqKkR2pQ5z43tQh for ; Sun, 2 Apr 2023 16:49:35 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dan@langille.org) Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4PqKkQ4S7yz41TH; Sun, 2 Apr 2023 16:49:34 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dan@langille.org) Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=pass header.d=langille.org header.s=fm2 header.b=oYHazDXN; dkim=pass header.d=messagingengine.com header.s=fm2 header.b=Af30LtTu; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of dan@langille.org designates 66.111.4.25 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=dan@langille.org; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=langille.org Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7664A5C016A; Sun, 2 Apr 2023 12:49:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Sun, 02 Apr 2023 12:49:33 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=langille.org; h= cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:content-type:date :date:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to; s=fm2; t= 1680454173; x=1680540573; bh=NRTkHzJLZ6TI3j+nXmJNcXe3qQpfcS6d61h rJjohlTo=; b=oYHazDXNnonQ/UTBv3bTKbQKXQ9zAsEGi4OAyFokB8SGEB7q11F j7K+IvIPR7BVIltIshm7TpMMrAYi1CEwoNe8MYKxobHesxXr1PZnDCoAXI70SyYr UbfpJDL6fpuF2CAU1zkOVgk4gf+13GbmFidO0mZyanK0OZVbsYtfOq54ZmDR3IqS een76i6rFr5OMrBtwoyO4PLK6I10YAVfFT4PU0wIcoKIuOV1Cq3SWUfS/xbLaG8b m5FFE0vGrdDRMXHdWu3tOa+4PEHPypq1zyjDPPD2s2gru+E7vW3LhJkTHQJmouzm tYCXvuDL7ojqSxPvalOKDC94+DIvdzFCUSg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding :content-type:content-type:date:date:feedback-id:feedback-id :from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; t= 1680454173; x=1680540573; bh=NRTkHzJLZ6TI3j+nXmJNcXe3qQpfcS6d61h rJjohlTo=; b=Af30LtTuNoLMBhNpchvv4NWNSQ11wz4exsXe9q/3IhFtKZqflQ7 LQeSqqGJO+6PaKdzCdrX0bTUs6FSe9BaQfR1vZXTncqGoYv/0M8rq1itSIXZ30L1 +n9bypGYlPkZe012UDN0L+eDQpdwuqrPcDtVpRordeHPJlA08ucB9DrregCZOKBp oNRfAuxCi/r7mIzrk7YEl5d4Fu+EAApV8q5fZ0bqQ5HnxqZ1QF40fXBAKpb8kMDU A5kY36Sst1HNjJF3/p8Njedy654crGa0hxa+epNvNwBViYo4pRb/yfHKvMyn6h2H DvlK2RjshVaL7R69ihkQSVpnQ62F8ffRcSA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvhedrvdeihedguddtiecutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfgh necuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmd enucfjughrpefuvfevfhfhkffffgggjggtgfesthekredttdefjeenucfhrhhomhepffgr nhcunfgrnhhgihhllhgvuceouggrnheslhgrnhhgihhllhgvrdhorhhgqeenucggtffrrg htthgvrhhnpeehheduffetleeiudehuefgieffueffudduueffvddtgfehfeehteffhfeu ieevieenucffohhmrghinheplhgrnhhgihhllhgvrdhorhhgnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuih iivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepuggrnheslhgrnhhgihhllhgvrdho rhhg X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: ifbf9424e:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Sun, 2 Apr 2023 12:49:32 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: Security Run Output To: Charlie Li Cc: User Questions , "Gerard E. Seibert" References: <20230326081128.00005b98@seibercom.net> From: Dan Langille Message-ID: <89fee8ce-45db-8224-f3ba-f754caf132cd@langille.org> Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2023 12:49:30 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.16; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 PostboxApp/7.0.59 List-Id: User questions List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-questions List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-US X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-5.20 / 15.00]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000]; DWL_DNSWL_LOW(-1.00)[messagingengine.com:dkim]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-1.00)[-1.000]; DMARC_POLICY_ALLOW(-0.50)[langille.org,none]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[langille.org:s=fm2,messagingengine.com:s=fm2]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:66.111.4.25]; RWL_MAILSPIKE_GOOD(-0.10)[66.111.4.25:from]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW(-0.10)[66.111.4.25:from]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:19151, ipnet:66.111.4.0/24, country:US]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; MLMMJ_DEST(0.00)[questions@freebsd.org]; RCVD_TLS_LAST(0.00)[]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[langille.org:+,messagingengine.com:+]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[4]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; FREEFALL_USER(0.00)[dan]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; TO_DN_ALL(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[] X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4PqKkQ4S7yz41TH X-Spamd-Bar: ----- X-ThisMailContainsUnwantedMimeParts: N Charlie Li wrote on 3/26/23 5:48 PM: > Gerard E. Seibert wrote: >> For quite some time now, I have been receiving a warning message of >> 1025 packages with mismatched checksums in the daily "Security Run >> Output" email. They are all prefixed with "py39-" >> > Because Python packages that build using the older method of directly > executing setup.py, aka distutils, have not yet been switched to not > compile bytecode during the build. The trigger to compile/remove > bytecode after all pkg(8) transactions complete had been reverted due > to an overreaction and opportunity to make the process more resilient. > These particular checksum mismatches are completely harmless. I don't wish to debate 'completely harmless'. I will state it was not without causing concern among users use the `pkg check` data. I am happy to hear that it has been reverted. I can confirm that after a few `pkg upgrade`s and `pkg install -f`s, the false positives have gone away. Alert fatigue is a valid concern.  Reverting the change was the right thing to do. Here's hoping that tomorrow's Security Run Output is clean. -- Dan Langille - dan@langille.org https://langille.org/