diff options
| author | John Ericson <John.Ericson@Obsidian.Systems> | 2022-09-22 10:43:48 -0400 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | John Ericson <John.Ericson@Obsidian.Systems> | 2022-09-22 10:49:31 -0400 |
| commit | 752f967c0fe2489fe13d8c2c65c3ecba72064adc (patch) | |
| tree | bb0d0b462040fc6af61a90d41b3f48e04c21fd30 /tests | |
| parent | f704c2720f136a6bb73a2e91d4a85e0e9a42ff6f (diff) | |
"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.
Diffstat (limited to 'tests')
| -rw-r--r-- | tests/signing.sh | 2 |
1 files changed, 1 insertions, 1 deletions
diff --git a/tests/signing.sh b/tests/signing.sh index 6aafbeb91..74f57966a 100644 --- a/tests/signing.sh +++ b/tests/signing.sh @@ -81,7 +81,7 @@ info=$(nix path-info --store file://$cacheDir --json $outPath2) [[ $info =~ 'cache1.example.org' ]] [[ $info =~ 'cache2.example.org' ]] -# Copying to a diverted store should fail due to a lack of valid signatures. +# Copying to a diverted store should fail due to a lack of trustworthy signatures. chmod -R u+w $TEST_ROOT/store0 || true rm -rf $TEST_ROOT/store0 (! nix copy --to $TEST_ROOT/store0 $outPath) |