1
1
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/NixOS/nix.git synced 2025-11-14 22:42:41 +01:00

"valid signature" -> "trustworthy signature"

I just had a colleague get confused by the previous phrase for good
reason. "valid" sounds like an *objective* criterion, e.g. and *invalid
signature* would be one that would be trusted by no one, e.g. because it
misformatted or something.

What is actually going is that there might be a signature which is
perfectly valid to *someone else*, but not to the user, because they
don't trust the corresponding public key. This is a *subjective*
criterion, because it depends on the arbitrary and personal choice of
which public keys to trust.

I therefore think "trustworthy" is a better adjective to use. Whether
something is worthy of trust is clearly subjective, and then "trust"
within that word nicely evokes `trusted-public-keys` and friends.
This commit is contained in:
John Ericson 2022-09-22 10:43:48 -04:00
parent f704c2720f
commit 752f967c0f
5 changed files with 6 additions and 6 deletions

View file

@ -751,7 +751,7 @@ void LocalStore::registerDrvOutput(const Realisation & info, CheckSigsFlag check
if (checkSigs == NoCheckSigs || !realisationIsUntrusted(info))
registerDrvOutput(info);
else
throw Error("cannot register realisation '%s' because it lacks a valid signature", info.outPath.to_string());
throw Error("cannot register realisation '%s' because it lacks a trustworthy signature", info.outPath.to_string());
}
void LocalStore::registerDrvOutput(const Realisation & info)
@ -1266,7 +1266,7 @@ void LocalStore::addToStore(const ValidPathInfo & info, Source & source,
RepairFlag repair, CheckSigsFlag checkSigs)
{
if (checkSigs && pathInfoIsUntrusted(info))
throw Error("cannot add path '%s' because it lacks a valid signature", printStorePath(info.path));
throw Error("cannot add path '%s' because it lacks a trustworthy signature", printStorePath(info.path));
addTempRoot(info.path);