Remove main key of pierre

Remove a main key

Details

• Username: @pierre
• PGP key ID: 0E8B644079F599DFC1DDC3973348882F6AC6A4C2
• Resignation: https://lists.archlinux.org/archives/list/arch-dev@lists.archlinux.org/thread/G4UMJUVZBZ5IRPK3F2GVXIBGZGJ5BBAP/ and https://lists.archlinux.org/archives/list/staff@lists.archlinux.org/message/P3PMRM6CLTPK7XROSLGU67CQDCQCIOQV/ as well as #18 (closed) and #163

Checks

Main key holders

• There are more than or equal to three valid main keys remaining after removal of this key.
• All packagers have at least three valid main key signatures for their packager key after removal of this key.
• A merge request to remove the main public key has been created

added remove main key label

assigned to @pierre, @grazzolini, @bluewind, @anthraxx, and @dvzrv

marked this issue as related to #18 (closed)

As mentioned in https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/archlinux-keyring/-/issues/163#note_63817, we can only proceed here, as soon as all packagers have at least three main key signatures.

@anthraxx, @bluewind, @grazzolini please proceed to add signatures for any packager keys still requiring them.

marked this issue as related to #112

marked this issue as related to #113

marked this issue as related to #114 (closed)

marked this issue as related to #116

marked this issue as related to #119

marked this issue as related to #146

marked this issue as related to #120

marked this issue as related to #122 (closed)

marked this issue as related to #123 (closed)

marked this issue as related to #126

marked this issue as related to #127

marked this issue as related to #128

marked this issue as related to #129 (closed)

marked this issue as related to #132

marked this issue as related to #143 (closed)

marked this issue as related to #149

marked this issue as related to #150

marked this issue as related to #151

marked this issue as related to #152

marked this issue as related to #153

marked this issue as related to #154

marked this issue as related to #155 (closed)

marked this issue as related to #157

marked this issue as related to #158

marked this issue as related to #159

marked this issue as related to #160

marked this issue as related to #162

marked this issue as related to #168

marked this issue as related to #169

Additionally, we will have issues with the following keys:

• @andrewsc : requires signatures from @anthraxx, @bluewind and @grazzolini (either in general or on @archlinux.org UID) - the key is marked as marginal trust right now!
• @coderobe : requires signatures from @anthraxx, @bluewind and @grazzolini (either in general or on @archlinux.org UID) - the key is marked as marginal trust right now!
• @jlichtblau: requires signatures from @anthraxx and @grazzolini - the key is marked as marginal trust right now (as it only has two signatures on its @archlinux.org UID) and will be revoked if @pierre's main key is revoked.
• @jsteel: requires signatures from @anthraxx and @grazzolini on the @archlinux.org UID - - the key is marked as marginal trust right now (as it only has two signatures on its @archlinux.org UID) and will be revoked if @pierre's main key is revoked.
• @nicohood: requires signatures from @anthraxx, @bluewind and @grazzolini on the @archlinux.org UID - the key is marked as marginal trust right now and would be revoked by revoking @pierre's key!

The above do not have a ticket attached to them and need to be fixed before we release a new version of the keyring!

All five of these have been signed by my new main key, solving the immediate marginal trust issues after revoking allan's main key. However @andrewsc and @nicohood still need at least one more signature by @anthraxx, @bluewind and @grazzolini, otherwise their trust will fall back to marginal when @pierre's key gets revoked (cf. #181 (closed)).

marked this issue as related to #173

unassigned @dvzrv

I sent verification tokens to @andrewsc, @coderobe, @jlichtblau and @nicohood so that I can sign their keys with my new main key.

Unfortunately @jsteel's key uses SHA-1 for its self-signatures, so I consider it to be unfit for signing in its current state. I have therefore sent him an email suggesting to fix the key using sq-keyring-linter first.

mentioned in merge request !104 (closed)

@jsteel's key is fixed, see !104 (closed). I have sent out a verification token to him as well and will update the aforementioned merge request with my main key signature once this process is complete.

mentioned in issue #177

mentioned in merge request !106 (merged)

removed the relation with #116

removed the relation with #120

removed the relation with #122 (closed)

removed the relation with #123 (closed)

removed the relation with #126

removed the relation with #127

removed the relation with #128

removed the relation with #129 (closed)