Because it’s kind of hard! Even if I follow their instructions. Maybe I’m just dumb . . . 🙁

  • Xanza@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    20 hours ago

    Signature verification protects you against malicious actors. Generally its not critical, but if you’re worried about the source you’re getting software from, then I highly recommend that you verify the signature. Ideally, you’re given an asc file with the distribution and assuming you have PGP installed (and have a key), it’s pretty easy.

    First you want to import the public key they are saying that they use to sign all of their distributions;

    gpg --auto-key-locate nodefault,wkd --locate-keys torbrowser@torproject.org
    

    Once it’s in your keyring, you sign it with your own key;

    gpg --sign-key torbrowser@torproject.org
    

    This is you telling the keyring that you trust this exact signing key, so now when you verify anything using that signing key (no matter where you get it from) you’ll get a little message saying “hey, we know who this is, this is probably safe!”;

    $ gpg --verify mullvad-browser-linux-x86_64-13.0.4.tar.xz.asc
    gpg: assuming signed data in 'mullvad-browser-linux-x86_64-13.0.4.tar.xz'
    gpg: Signature made Thu Nov 23 11:24:40 2023 CET
    gpg:                using RSA key 613188FC5BE2176E3ED54901E53D989A9E2D47BF
    gpg: Good signature from "Tor Browser Developers (signing key) <torbrowser@torproject.org>" [full]
    

    In all reality, signing archives like this isn’t really necessary anymore. In the early days of the internet when resources were scarce and web-servers didn’t have 100% uptime, people mainly got software from FTP servers that weren’t up all the time. So you have to search and hunt for software and sometimes get it from random places. This was a way for you to ensure that even though you didn’t get it from an official source, that the software you were about to put on your machine wasn’t messed with.

    These days you’re gonna get it directly from Mullvad–but even so, using signing keys protects you from MITM attacks, so that’s always cool. lol.

    • Alas Poor Erinaceus@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      20 hours ago

      Thank you for taking the time to write all that! I did do what you described, but the RSA key I got at the end was different from what Mullvad’s webpage says, which is the same as what you put, I think: 6131 . . . etc.

      • Xanza@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        20 hours ago

        Good signature from "Tor Browser Developers (signing key) <torbrowser@torproject.org>" [full]

        Did you see this notification at all when you verified the key signature?

        • Alas Poor Erinaceus@lemmy.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          20 hours ago

          Yes, I got:

          Good signature from "Tor Browser Developers (signing key) <torbrowser@torproject.org>" [full]

          Does that mean it’s ok? Maybe Mullvad just needs to update their website?