Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Gpup signature #95

Open
ronmanp opened this issue Feb 28, 2018 · 10 comments
Open

Gpup signature #95

ronmanp opened this issue Feb 28, 2018 · 10 comments

Comments

@ronmanp
Copy link

ronmanp commented Feb 28, 2018

This is more of a feature request and not really an issue per say.
But gpup.exe is not digitally signed which makes UAC warn you that this application is untrusted so it would be great to sign it for security reasons.

Happens on all prompts from Gpup so it's all the time you either update or install/uninstall a plugin.
Happens on all builds but currently I'm using these versions:

  • Notepad++ v7.5.4 x86
  • Plugin Manager 1.4.9.0

Thank you!

@jakevis
Copy link

jakevis commented Mar 21, 2018

+1 would be great to have this fixed

@nitzanms
Copy link

+1 critical for security

@Eagle3386
Copy link

Much less important since N++ brings its own plugin manager nowadays - which, BTW, is already signed..

@chcg
Copy link
Collaborator

chcg commented Mar 14, 2019

@Eagle3386 Yes it was, but see https://notepad-plus-plus.org/news/notepad-7.6.4-released.html.

3 years ago DigiCert donated a 3 years code signing certificate to the project, and every good thing has its end, the certificate has been expired since the beginning of this year.

@Eagle3386
Copy link

@chcg Yeah, read it just around noon today. But then the whole point becomes obsolete anyway as there's no sense in a signed plugin manager if its host program isn't signed, too.

@SuperSandro2000
Copy link

We need LetsEncrypt for exe signing.

@Eagle3386
Copy link

LE does not offer certs with code signing support.

@SuperSandro2000
Copy link

SuperSandro2000 commented Mar 15, 2019

Yeah I know. I meant to say that they should add something to their service

@Eagle3386
Copy link

Eagle3386 commented Mar 15, 2019

Got it. LE stated (states?) that they will only serve for HTTPS, no ambitions or even plans for code signing.. 😥

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

6 participants