On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 10:48:46AM +0200, Panu Matilainen wrote:
On 1/26/21 8:44 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> So, the thread here kind of fell quiet with everything else going on.
>
> It seems clear there's issues to address here before this change might
> get approved. Here's my list:
>
> * Try and change the storage format of the signatures to not take up
> tons of room. I guess this would be in ima tools and sigul?
>
That'd be rpm upstream work.
On my F33 laptop, there are 331284 rpm-installed files. The IMA signature as
proposed is apparently 162 bytes per file in the hex-encoded format, this
makes for approximately 51 megabytes of data. My rpmdb is about 115
megabytes. That'd be almost 45% increase in size!
SO, I don't really understand... Patrick says in the Change:
"The size of the rpmdb increases from 22952 to 28416 bytes, a 20%
increase. This is on an install size of 1.7GB in total, so this 5MB
increase is a 0.3% size increase on the final installed system."
Is that just because he used the server install with fewer files?
Or is your or his math wrong here?
kevin