Thanks for reporting this! Unfortunately, I'm not able to reproduce this. I
hope you can help me figure out what is wrong. Would you be willing to share
your tofu.db with me? Feel free to send it to me directly
(8F17777118A33DDA9BA48E62AACB3243630052D9); it contains some privacy sensitive
information (namely, who you communicate with).

Thanks!

tofu.db sent via encrypted email today.

On Dec 2, 2016, 12:53 AM -0800, Neal Walfield via BTS <gnupg@bugs.g10code.com>, wrote:

Neal Walfield <neal@walfield.org> added the comment:

Thanks for reporting this! Unfortunately, I'm not able to reproduce this. I
hope you can help me figure out what is wrong. Would you be willing to share
your tofu.db with me? Feel free to send it to me directly
(8F17777118A33DDA9BA48E62AACB3243630052D9); it contains some privacy sensitive
information (namely, who you communicate with).

Thanks!

---

status: unread -> chatting

---

GnuPG's BTS <gnupg@bugs.g10code.com
<T2853

---

Thanks! I tried reproducing this issue with your tofu.db (using HEAD), but I
didn't see the warning:

$ gpg --verify /tmp/TrueTimeStamp-certificate-4793.txt
gpg: Signature made Thu 24 Nov 2016 08:08:29 AM CET
gpg: using DSA key 6F3B2E6AB748A8F8
gpg: Good signature from "TrueTimeStamp <signing-department@TrueTimeStamp.org>"
[marginal]
gpg: signing-department@truetimestamp.org: Verified 2 signatures in the past

12 days.  Encrypted 0 messages.

gpg: Warning: you have yet to encrypt a message to this key!
gpg: Warning: if you think you've seen more signatures by this key and user

id, then this key might be a forgery!  Carefully examine the email address
for small variations.  If the key is suspect, then use
  gpg --tofu-policy bad 83289060F40DED088CF246B56F3B2E6AB748A8F8
to mark it as being bad.

gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with sufficiently trusted signatures!
gpg: It is not certain that the signature belongs to the owner.
Primary key fingerprint: 8328 9060 F40D ED08 8CF2 46B5 6F3B 2E6A B748 A8F8

Most likely, this is because when you verifies the message, the error was fixed.
Can you confirm this for me by trying to reproduce the error with your current
tofu.db? If there is no error, could you send me a copy of the tofu.db from
before the initial verification?

Thanks!

Hmmm. So since I filed this bug I happened to do a key transition so I started with a
brand new gnupg dir. So in trying to replicate this again I was starting from scratch.
I imported the key and downloaded the signed file from the gist I sent you. I still see
the same output! This leads me to wonder if there is something different about how the
tofu code compiles when installed on OS X via homebrew?? The gnupg installation didn't
change, but my whole .gnupg dir is new.

$ gpg2 --verify ts.txt
gpg: Signature made Wed Nov 23 23:08:29 2016 PST
gpg: using DSA key 0x6F3B2E6AB748A8F8
gpg: Good signature from "TrueTimeStamp <signing-department@TrueTimeStamp.org>"
[marginal]
gpg: DBG: tofu.c:2772: strtoul failed for DB returned string (tail=): Invalid argument
gpg: DBG: tofu.c:2774: strtoul failed for DB returned string (tail=): Invalid argument
gpg: signing-department@truetimestamp.org: Verified 1 signature in the past

0 seconds, and encrypted 0 messages.

gpg: Warning: we've only seen one message signed using this key and user id!
gpg: Warning: you have yet to encrypt a message to this key!
gpg: Warning: if you think you've seen more signatures by this key and user

id, then this key might be a forgery!  Carefully examine the email address
for small variations.  If the key is suspect, then use
  gpg --tofu-policy bad 83289060F40DED088CF246B56F3B2E6AB748A8F8
to mark it as being bad.

gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with sufficiently trusted signatures!
gpg: It is not certain that the signature belongs to the owner.
Primary key fingerprint: 8328 9060 F40D ED08 8CF2 46B5 6F3B 2E6A B748 A8F8

FYI, here is the homebrew formula that is used to compile GnuPG

https://github.com/Homebrew/homebrew-versions/blob/master/gnupg21.rb#L46

Thanks for the feedback! Can you please compile gpg with debugging symbols, add
a break point on log_debug in string_to_ulong (in g10/tofu.c), and then do 'run
--verify ts.txt'. When you hit the breakpoint, please do a 'bt full', print out
the value of "string" and "tail" (using gdb's 'p' command), and repeat (continue
execution using 'c').

Thanks!

"Can you please compile gpg with debugging symbols"...

Sorry, I am not currently setup to compile GnuPG and all its dependencies and I'm not
even sure of the details as to how to go about doing so. As I mentioned I am installing
pre-compiled binaries compiled server side by the homebrew project which installs those
binaries.

I would imagine the GnuPG project has an OS X development machine to test/debug on. No?

If you have specific changes you would want me to make to the homebrew recipe I linked
to I can try to do that.

2.1.17 has been released. I would suggest to try it first so that we do not
need to evaluate an older version.

FWIW, I doubt that 2.1.17 fixes the issue. But, I've improved the debugging
out, so if you would try to reproduce the problem, it would still be useful.
Thanks!

I had a chance to run this test against 2.1.17 today as that version has been recently
released via homebrew. The error is essentially the same, but the debug output is
indeed slightly different. Now the debug line numbers are different and there is the
addition of string=''; in the debug output. I didn't notice anything else that looked
significantly different.

/tmp$ gpg2 --verify TrueTimeStamp-certificate-4793.txt
gpg: Signature made Wed Nov 23 23:08:29 2016 PST
gpg: using DSA key 0x6F3B2E6AB748A8F8
gpg: Good signature from "TrueTimeStamp <signing-department@TrueTimeStamp.org>"
[marginal]
gpg: DBG: tofu.c:3068: strtoul failed for TOFU DB data; returned string (string='';
tail=''): Invalid argument
gpg: DBG: tofu.c:3070: strtoul failed for TOFU DB data; returned string (string='';
tail=''): Invalid argument
gpg: signing-department@truetimestamp.org: Verified 1 signature in the past

5 weeks.  Encrypted 0 messages.

gpg: Warning: we've only seen one message signed using this key and user id!
gpg: Warning: you have yet to encrypt a message to this key!
gpg: Warning: if you think you've seen more signatures by this key and user

id, then this key might be a forgery!  Carefully examine the email address
for small variations.  If the key is suspect, then use
  gpg --tofu-policy bad 83289060F40DED088CF246B56F3B2E6AB748A8F8
to mark it as being bad.

gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with sufficiently trusted signatures!
gpg: It is not certain that the signature belongs to the owner.
Primary key fingerprint: 8328 9060 F40D ED08 8CF2 46B5 6F3B 2E6A B748 A8F8

According to SUSv3:

If the subject sequence is empty or does not have the expected form, no

conversion is performed

...
If no conversion could be performed, 0 is returned  and errno may be set to

[EINVAL].

  http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/007908799/xsh/strtol.html

It appears that MacOS X sets errno to EINVAL, but glibc doesn't.
(The attached program should expose the behavior; I haven't run it yet on Max OS
X, but I'd be interested in the result.)

This should be fixed by 407f5f9baea5591f148974240a87dfb43e5efef3 .

Thanks for reporting this!

Here is the output from the program you attached running on OS X Sierra and compiled
with gcc. Is it what you expected?

$ ./a.out
0 => 0; tail = ''; errno = Undefined error: 0 (0)
1 => 1; tail = ''; errno = Undefined error: 0 (0)
=> 0; tail = ''; errno = Invalid argument (22)

I'm curious. So what was it about this particular key and signed text that caused this
to expose this error while others did not?

Neal: Do you have an answer for him?

Glenn: I'm not exactly sure why your scenario exposed this issue. I suspect
that it has something to do with you have never used this key for encryption
prior to the verification, but it would require more investigation to confirm.

I marking this as resolved since I think the issue is fixed. If this is not the
case, please reopen.