MX 16 KDE Checksum

[scorpio]

Hi guys,

I'd like to try out Stevo's KDE. Could someone, please, post a public SHA256 of the .iso? Like right here on the forum? I've read the sum is inside the .zip. That kinda defeats the purpose. Checksums are for verifying data integrity as well as data authenticity. I'd rather have a post from Stevo himself in all fairness. Last but not least, I'm addressing a big thanks to Dolphin et al. for the uniquely awesome job they've done with MX.

[Stevo]

It's actually a sha512 hash in the zip:

Code: Select all

9c63b3e4b9f2eb99651ebd770e4345de8c0c6d015ea1741646c78911234702b0aff4e9aa554c58c50efa43b893f0a94eae317e329a95aeb9f1aea3e10b86c6a8  MX16-x64_KDE_added_March_2017.iso

I could generate a 256 bit one if you really need it.

[Adrian]

I think the point is that somebody could modify the Zip and put a different hash inside, do you have it signed?

[scorpio]

Thanks Stevo. That's all I needed.

[Stevo]

I think the point is that somebody could modify the Zip and put a different hash inside, do you have it signed?

Yes, there's a sig file included.

[timkb4cq]

I maintain the MX repositories & main server as well as the nl.mxrepo.com & iso.mxreo.com mirrors. I downloaded that zip file to the iso.mxrepo.com mirror and uploaded it from there to mxrepo.com. Then I unzipped it and moved the files it to the public area on iso.mxrepo.com from which the mirroring rsync jobs sent it to the other mirrors.

You'll find the separate sha512 & md5 files along with the iso at the LA mirror here:
http://iso.mxrepo.com/Snapshots/Community_Respins/

Since the sha512 in the zip file matches the one on the mirror (I just checked), there has been no tampering since the upload.
Of course, only Stevo can verify it didn't get changed in the 12 minutes between his notification to me that he had uploaded to his google drive to the time I downloaded it...

[anticapitalista]

Hi guys,

I'd like to try out Stevo's KDE. Could someone, please, post a public SHA256 of the .iso? Like right here on the forum? I've read the sum is inside the .zip. That kinda defeats the purpose. Checksums are for verifying data integrity as well as data authenticity. I'd rather have a post from Stevo himself in all fairness. Last but not least, I'm addressing a big thanks to Dolphin et al. for the uniquely awesome job they've done with MX.

I disagree with your point that 'Checksums are for verifying data authenticity'. You should use the .sig file for that. The checksums are really only for verifying data integrity. Agree with you that they should both be made public though.

[scorpio]

Hi aticapitalista,

I agree to your disagreement as well as your agreement. A public SHA512 is now in place and I'm grateful for that.

[scorpio]

I maintain the MX repositories & main server as well as the nl.mxrepo.com & iso.mxreo.com mirrors. I downloaded that zip file to the iso.mxrepo.com mirror and uploaded it from there to mxrepo.com. Then I unzipped it and moved the files it to the public area on iso.mxrepo.com from which the mirroring rsync jobs sent it to the other mirrors.

You'll find the separate sha512 & md5 files along with the iso at the LA mirror here:
http://iso.mxrepo.com/Snapshots/Community_Respins/

Since the sha512 in the zip file matches the one on the mirror (I just checked), there has been no tampering since the upload.
Of course, only Stevo can verify it didn't get changed in the 12 minutes between his notification to me that he had uploaded to his google drive to the time I downloaded it...

Thank you. https? I'm always a bit concerned about these things, that's all.

All in all, I've found a responsive and supportive community and that makes a difference.

@Stevo I like Plasma but it's not mature enough. Thank you man. Keep up the great work. I might be back with further questions, If I may. I'm running Smaragd ...

[Stevo]

Is that the KDE addon that lets the user use Emerald window decorations? I was just thinking about porting it over, too!