The repository 'http://dl.google.com/linux/chrome/deb stable Release' is not signed
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ height:90px;width:728px;box-sizing:border-box;
}
I have the following step in my CircleCi setup to install Google Chrome:
- run:
name: Install Chrome headless
working_directory: /
command: |
wget -q -O - https://dl-ssl.google.com/linux/linux_signing_key.pub | apt-key add - &&
echo "deb http://dl.google.com/linux/chrome/deb/ stable main" > /etc/apt/sources.list.d/google.list &&
apt-get update &&
apt-get install -y dbus-x11 google-chrome-unstable &&
rm -rf /var/lib/apt/lists/*
It stopped working and return the following error message:
W: GPG error: http://dl.google.com/linux/chrome/deb stable Release: The following signatures were invalid: EXPKEYSIG 1397BC53640DB551 Google Inc. (Linux Packages Signing Authority) <linux-packages-keymaster@google.com>
W: The repository 'http://dl.google.com/linux/chrome/deb stable Release' is not signed.
N: Data from such a repository can't be authenticated and is therefore potentially dangerous to use.
N: See apt-secure(8) manpage for repository creation and user configuration details.
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
The following additional packages will be installed:
libappindicator3-1 libdbusmenu-gtk3-4 libindicator3-7
Recommended packages:
libu2f-udev
The following NEW packages will be installed:
dbus-x11 google-chrome-unstable libappindicator3-1 libdbusmenu-gtk3-4
libindicator3-7
0 upgraded, 5 newly installed, 0 to remove and 48 not upgraded.
Need to get 60.4 MB of archives.
After this operation, 214 MB of additional disk space will be used.
WARNING: The following packages cannot be authenticated!
google-chrome-unstable
E: There were unauthenticated packages and -y was used without --allow-unauthenticated
Exited with code 100
How can I fix that?
linux google-chrome ubuntu apt
|
show 1 more comment
I have the following step in my CircleCi setup to install Google Chrome:
- run:
name: Install Chrome headless
working_directory: /
command: |
wget -q -O - https://dl-ssl.google.com/linux/linux_signing_key.pub | apt-key add - &&
echo "deb http://dl.google.com/linux/chrome/deb/ stable main" > /etc/apt/sources.list.d/google.list &&
apt-get update &&
apt-get install -y dbus-x11 google-chrome-unstable &&
rm -rf /var/lib/apt/lists/*
It stopped working and return the following error message:
W: GPG error: http://dl.google.com/linux/chrome/deb stable Release: The following signatures were invalid: EXPKEYSIG 1397BC53640DB551 Google Inc. (Linux Packages Signing Authority) <linux-packages-keymaster@google.com>
W: The repository 'http://dl.google.com/linux/chrome/deb stable Release' is not signed.
N: Data from such a repository can't be authenticated and is therefore potentially dangerous to use.
N: See apt-secure(8) manpage for repository creation and user configuration details.
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
The following additional packages will be installed:
libappindicator3-1 libdbusmenu-gtk3-4 libindicator3-7
Recommended packages:
libu2f-udev
The following NEW packages will be installed:
dbus-x11 google-chrome-unstable libappindicator3-1 libdbusmenu-gtk3-4
libindicator3-7
0 upgraded, 5 newly installed, 0 to remove and 48 not upgraded.
Need to get 60.4 MB of archives.
After this operation, 214 MB of additional disk space will be used.
WARNING: The following packages cannot be authenticated!
google-chrome-unstable
E: There were unauthenticated packages and -y was used without --allow-unauthenticated
Exited with code 100
How can I fix that?
linux google-chrome ubuntu apt
1
I don't understand why Google makes it so difficult (partially impossible) to report bugs. I've found even Account-concerning Bugs last year and they didn't allow me in any form to contact them. So sad.
– DanFromGermany
17 hours ago
Have you tried contactinglinux-packages-keymaster@google.com
?
– DanFromGermany
17 hours ago
I have the exact same GPG error. Maybe Google messed something up signing their latest updates?
– Panni
17 hours ago
1
this question has a better title yet I see duplicate over at askubuntu.com/questions/1133199/… ... possible solution is to comment out its normal install you show above and manually copy over a previous install of google
– Scott Stensland
13 hours ago
1
@DanFromGermany I have contactedlinux-packages-keymaster@google.com
now. Let's see if I get any response (I have pretty low confidence though)
– moritz
12 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
I have the following step in my CircleCi setup to install Google Chrome:
- run:
name: Install Chrome headless
working_directory: /
command: |
wget -q -O - https://dl-ssl.google.com/linux/linux_signing_key.pub | apt-key add - &&
echo "deb http://dl.google.com/linux/chrome/deb/ stable main" > /etc/apt/sources.list.d/google.list &&
apt-get update &&
apt-get install -y dbus-x11 google-chrome-unstable &&
rm -rf /var/lib/apt/lists/*
It stopped working and return the following error message:
W: GPG error: http://dl.google.com/linux/chrome/deb stable Release: The following signatures were invalid: EXPKEYSIG 1397BC53640DB551 Google Inc. (Linux Packages Signing Authority) <linux-packages-keymaster@google.com>
W: The repository 'http://dl.google.com/linux/chrome/deb stable Release' is not signed.
N: Data from such a repository can't be authenticated and is therefore potentially dangerous to use.
N: See apt-secure(8) manpage for repository creation and user configuration details.
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
The following additional packages will be installed:
libappindicator3-1 libdbusmenu-gtk3-4 libindicator3-7
Recommended packages:
libu2f-udev
The following NEW packages will be installed:
dbus-x11 google-chrome-unstable libappindicator3-1 libdbusmenu-gtk3-4
libindicator3-7
0 upgraded, 5 newly installed, 0 to remove and 48 not upgraded.
Need to get 60.4 MB of archives.
After this operation, 214 MB of additional disk space will be used.
WARNING: The following packages cannot be authenticated!
google-chrome-unstable
E: There were unauthenticated packages and -y was used without --allow-unauthenticated
Exited with code 100
How can I fix that?
linux google-chrome ubuntu apt
I have the following step in my CircleCi setup to install Google Chrome:
- run:
name: Install Chrome headless
working_directory: /
command: |
wget -q -O - https://dl-ssl.google.com/linux/linux_signing_key.pub | apt-key add - &&
echo "deb http://dl.google.com/linux/chrome/deb/ stable main" > /etc/apt/sources.list.d/google.list &&
apt-get update &&
apt-get install -y dbus-x11 google-chrome-unstable &&
rm -rf /var/lib/apt/lists/*
It stopped working and return the following error message:
W: GPG error: http://dl.google.com/linux/chrome/deb stable Release: The following signatures were invalid: EXPKEYSIG 1397BC53640DB551 Google Inc. (Linux Packages Signing Authority) <linux-packages-keymaster@google.com>
W: The repository 'http://dl.google.com/linux/chrome/deb stable Release' is not signed.
N: Data from such a repository can't be authenticated and is therefore potentially dangerous to use.
N: See apt-secure(8) manpage for repository creation and user configuration details.
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
The following additional packages will be installed:
libappindicator3-1 libdbusmenu-gtk3-4 libindicator3-7
Recommended packages:
libu2f-udev
The following NEW packages will be installed:
dbus-x11 google-chrome-unstable libappindicator3-1 libdbusmenu-gtk3-4
libindicator3-7
0 upgraded, 5 newly installed, 0 to remove and 48 not upgraded.
Need to get 60.4 MB of archives.
After this operation, 214 MB of additional disk space will be used.
WARNING: The following packages cannot be authenticated!
google-chrome-unstable
E: There were unauthenticated packages and -y was used without --allow-unauthenticated
Exited with code 100
How can I fix that?
linux google-chrome ubuntu apt
linux google-chrome ubuntu apt
edited 13 hours ago
Damien Clauzel
1588
1588
asked 17 hours ago
Mateusz UrbańskiMateusz Urbański
2,51422973
2,51422973
1
I don't understand why Google makes it so difficult (partially impossible) to report bugs. I've found even Account-concerning Bugs last year and they didn't allow me in any form to contact them. So sad.
– DanFromGermany
17 hours ago
Have you tried contactinglinux-packages-keymaster@google.com
?
– DanFromGermany
17 hours ago
I have the exact same GPG error. Maybe Google messed something up signing their latest updates?
– Panni
17 hours ago
1
this question has a better title yet I see duplicate over at askubuntu.com/questions/1133199/… ... possible solution is to comment out its normal install you show above and manually copy over a previous install of google
– Scott Stensland
13 hours ago
1
@DanFromGermany I have contactedlinux-packages-keymaster@google.com
now. Let's see if I get any response (I have pretty low confidence though)
– moritz
12 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
1
I don't understand why Google makes it so difficult (partially impossible) to report bugs. I've found even Account-concerning Bugs last year and they didn't allow me in any form to contact them. So sad.
– DanFromGermany
17 hours ago
Have you tried contactinglinux-packages-keymaster@google.com
?
– DanFromGermany
17 hours ago
I have the exact same GPG error. Maybe Google messed something up signing their latest updates?
– Panni
17 hours ago
1
this question has a better title yet I see duplicate over at askubuntu.com/questions/1133199/… ... possible solution is to comment out its normal install you show above and manually copy over a previous install of google
– Scott Stensland
13 hours ago
1
@DanFromGermany I have contactedlinux-packages-keymaster@google.com
now. Let's see if I get any response (I have pretty low confidence though)
– moritz
12 hours ago
1
1
I don't understand why Google makes it so difficult (partially impossible) to report bugs. I've found even Account-concerning Bugs last year and they didn't allow me in any form to contact them. So sad.
– DanFromGermany
17 hours ago
I don't understand why Google makes it so difficult (partially impossible) to report bugs. I've found even Account-concerning Bugs last year and they didn't allow me in any form to contact them. So sad.
– DanFromGermany
17 hours ago
Have you tried contacting
linux-packages-keymaster@google.com
?– DanFromGermany
17 hours ago
Have you tried contacting
linux-packages-keymaster@google.com
?– DanFromGermany
17 hours ago
I have the exact same GPG error. Maybe Google messed something up signing their latest updates?
– Panni
17 hours ago
I have the exact same GPG error. Maybe Google messed something up signing their latest updates?
– Panni
17 hours ago
1
1
this question has a better title yet I see duplicate over at askubuntu.com/questions/1133199/… ... possible solution is to comment out its normal install you show above and manually copy over a previous install of google
– Scott Stensland
13 hours ago
this question has a better title yet I see duplicate over at askubuntu.com/questions/1133199/… ... possible solution is to comment out its normal install you show above and manually copy over a previous install of google
– Scott Stensland
13 hours ago
1
1
@DanFromGermany I have contacted
linux-packages-keymaster@google.com
now. Let's see if I get any response (I have pretty low confidence though)– moritz
12 hours ago
@DanFromGermany I have contacted
linux-packages-keymaster@google.com
now. Let's see if I get any response (I have pretty low confidence though)– moritz
12 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
You don't. You must wait for Google to renew their keys and for an update.
The important message is:
The following signatures were invalid: EXPKEYSIG 1397BC53640DB551 Google Inc. (Linux Packages Signing Authority)
It means that the cryptographic signature is invalid. The source of this can be an attack, a misconfiguration, or other kind of technical problem. Forcing your system to update will result in running an unverified version of your web browser, which can expose you to a lot of security troubles.
It's breaking CI pipelines all over the place. Do you know any way to ignore a repository when runningapt update
? Our pipeline does not need a more recent version of this repo.
– Overdrivr
11 hours ago
Apt doesn’t have the possibilité to skip a repository. What about redirecting STDERR to a log file?apt update 2>/tmp/apt_error.log
– Damien Clauzel
11 hours ago
@DamienClauzel you can bypass the check withtrusted=yes
in your source list. See manpages.debian.org/jessie/apt/sources.list.5.en.html i.e.deb [trusted=yes] http://dl.google....
– YaguraStation
9 hours ago
Yes, but this does not skip the repository: instead, it makes it treated as always secured, which is not the same thing at all. With this, you will get an untrusted update (this is Bad) instead of having no update.
– Damien Clauzel
3 hours ago
add a comment |
Cannot comment because of reputation.
It's the same of this question (10 mins of difference): https://askubuntu.com/questions/1133199/the-following-signatures-were-invalid-expkeysig-1397bc53640db551
Sort explanation: the GPG key on Google side expired, so you (we) have to wait.
I dont't think so, because they have renewed it in 2017 already, see my gist from back then: gist.github.com/YaguraStation/1f707c9c0ebd666ca3e943c7eec8ad0c Also anapt-key list
on an affected machine should show that the keys only expire 2020.
– YaguraStation
9 hours ago
add a comment |
Plan 1
This is the protection you are getting from these checks. You don't
want to update your software right now while something is messed up on
Google's end. Wait until they fix it. Don't try to override by
reinstalling keys until some official word comes out that a new key is
the solution.
Plan 2
Waiting until they fix it may not be an option for all. E.g. this is
breaking CI pipelines for us. If you now what you are doing, you might
take the risk and disable checks for this repo for now by adding
[trusted=yes] to it's configuration: deb [trusted=yes]
http://dl.google.com/linux/chrome/deb/ stable main –
source
add a comment |
apt-key adv --keyserver pgp.surfnet.nl --recv-key 0x7721F63BD38B4796
Add the above line after you fetch the key and it will work .This is the latest key
or use this :
RUN curl -o google.key.pub https://dl-ssl.google.com/linux/linux_signing_key.pub &&
apt-key add google.key.pub &&
rm -rf google.key.pub &&
echo "deb [arch=amd64, trusted=yes ] http://dl.google.com/linux/chrome/deb/ stable main" >> /etc/apt/sources.list.d/google.list &&
apt-get update -y | sed "/jessie-updates/d" /etc/apt/sources.list
3
No. No, this is not the right thing to do. Don't do this.
– wizzwizz4
10 hours ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
StackExchange.snippets.init();
});
});
}, "code-snippets");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f55647076%2fthe-repository-http-dl-google-com-linux-chrome-deb-stable-release-is-not-sig%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
You don't. You must wait for Google to renew their keys and for an update.
The important message is:
The following signatures were invalid: EXPKEYSIG 1397BC53640DB551 Google Inc. (Linux Packages Signing Authority)
It means that the cryptographic signature is invalid. The source of this can be an attack, a misconfiguration, or other kind of technical problem. Forcing your system to update will result in running an unverified version of your web browser, which can expose you to a lot of security troubles.
It's breaking CI pipelines all over the place. Do you know any way to ignore a repository when runningapt update
? Our pipeline does not need a more recent version of this repo.
– Overdrivr
11 hours ago
Apt doesn’t have the possibilité to skip a repository. What about redirecting STDERR to a log file?apt update 2>/tmp/apt_error.log
– Damien Clauzel
11 hours ago
@DamienClauzel you can bypass the check withtrusted=yes
in your source list. See manpages.debian.org/jessie/apt/sources.list.5.en.html i.e.deb [trusted=yes] http://dl.google....
– YaguraStation
9 hours ago
Yes, but this does not skip the repository: instead, it makes it treated as always secured, which is not the same thing at all. With this, you will get an untrusted update (this is Bad) instead of having no update.
– Damien Clauzel
3 hours ago
add a comment |
You don't. You must wait for Google to renew their keys and for an update.
The important message is:
The following signatures were invalid: EXPKEYSIG 1397BC53640DB551 Google Inc. (Linux Packages Signing Authority)
It means that the cryptographic signature is invalid. The source of this can be an attack, a misconfiguration, or other kind of technical problem. Forcing your system to update will result in running an unverified version of your web browser, which can expose you to a lot of security troubles.
It's breaking CI pipelines all over the place. Do you know any way to ignore a repository when runningapt update
? Our pipeline does not need a more recent version of this repo.
– Overdrivr
11 hours ago
Apt doesn’t have the possibilité to skip a repository. What about redirecting STDERR to a log file?apt update 2>/tmp/apt_error.log
– Damien Clauzel
11 hours ago
@DamienClauzel you can bypass the check withtrusted=yes
in your source list. See manpages.debian.org/jessie/apt/sources.list.5.en.html i.e.deb [trusted=yes] http://dl.google....
– YaguraStation
9 hours ago
Yes, but this does not skip the repository: instead, it makes it treated as always secured, which is not the same thing at all. With this, you will get an untrusted update (this is Bad) instead of having no update.
– Damien Clauzel
3 hours ago
add a comment |
You don't. You must wait for Google to renew their keys and for an update.
The important message is:
The following signatures were invalid: EXPKEYSIG 1397BC53640DB551 Google Inc. (Linux Packages Signing Authority)
It means that the cryptographic signature is invalid. The source of this can be an attack, a misconfiguration, or other kind of technical problem. Forcing your system to update will result in running an unverified version of your web browser, which can expose you to a lot of security troubles.
You don't. You must wait for Google to renew their keys and for an update.
The important message is:
The following signatures were invalid: EXPKEYSIG 1397BC53640DB551 Google Inc. (Linux Packages Signing Authority)
It means that the cryptographic signature is invalid. The source of this can be an attack, a misconfiguration, or other kind of technical problem. Forcing your system to update will result in running an unverified version of your web browser, which can expose you to a lot of security troubles.
answered 17 hours ago
Damien ClauzelDamien Clauzel
1588
1588
It's breaking CI pipelines all over the place. Do you know any way to ignore a repository when runningapt update
? Our pipeline does not need a more recent version of this repo.
– Overdrivr
11 hours ago
Apt doesn’t have the possibilité to skip a repository. What about redirecting STDERR to a log file?apt update 2>/tmp/apt_error.log
– Damien Clauzel
11 hours ago
@DamienClauzel you can bypass the check withtrusted=yes
in your source list. See manpages.debian.org/jessie/apt/sources.list.5.en.html i.e.deb [trusted=yes] http://dl.google....
– YaguraStation
9 hours ago
Yes, but this does not skip the repository: instead, it makes it treated as always secured, which is not the same thing at all. With this, you will get an untrusted update (this is Bad) instead of having no update.
– Damien Clauzel
3 hours ago
add a comment |
It's breaking CI pipelines all over the place. Do you know any way to ignore a repository when runningapt update
? Our pipeline does not need a more recent version of this repo.
– Overdrivr
11 hours ago
Apt doesn’t have the possibilité to skip a repository. What about redirecting STDERR to a log file?apt update 2>/tmp/apt_error.log
– Damien Clauzel
11 hours ago
@DamienClauzel you can bypass the check withtrusted=yes
in your source list. See manpages.debian.org/jessie/apt/sources.list.5.en.html i.e.deb [trusted=yes] http://dl.google....
– YaguraStation
9 hours ago
Yes, but this does not skip the repository: instead, it makes it treated as always secured, which is not the same thing at all. With this, you will get an untrusted update (this is Bad) instead of having no update.
– Damien Clauzel
3 hours ago
It's breaking CI pipelines all over the place. Do you know any way to ignore a repository when running
apt update
? Our pipeline does not need a more recent version of this repo.– Overdrivr
11 hours ago
It's breaking CI pipelines all over the place. Do you know any way to ignore a repository when running
apt update
? Our pipeline does not need a more recent version of this repo.– Overdrivr
11 hours ago
Apt doesn’t have the possibilité to skip a repository. What about redirecting STDERR to a log file?
apt update 2>/tmp/apt_error.log
– Damien Clauzel
11 hours ago
Apt doesn’t have the possibilité to skip a repository. What about redirecting STDERR to a log file?
apt update 2>/tmp/apt_error.log
– Damien Clauzel
11 hours ago
@DamienClauzel you can bypass the check with
trusted=yes
in your source list. See manpages.debian.org/jessie/apt/sources.list.5.en.html i.e. deb [trusted=yes] http://dl.google....
– YaguraStation
9 hours ago
@DamienClauzel you can bypass the check with
trusted=yes
in your source list. See manpages.debian.org/jessie/apt/sources.list.5.en.html i.e. deb [trusted=yes] http://dl.google....
– YaguraStation
9 hours ago
Yes, but this does not skip the repository: instead, it makes it treated as always secured, which is not the same thing at all. With this, you will get an untrusted update (this is Bad) instead of having no update.
– Damien Clauzel
3 hours ago
Yes, but this does not skip the repository: instead, it makes it treated as always secured, which is not the same thing at all. With this, you will get an untrusted update (this is Bad) instead of having no update.
– Damien Clauzel
3 hours ago
add a comment |
Cannot comment because of reputation.
It's the same of this question (10 mins of difference): https://askubuntu.com/questions/1133199/the-following-signatures-were-invalid-expkeysig-1397bc53640db551
Sort explanation: the GPG key on Google side expired, so you (we) have to wait.
I dont't think so, because they have renewed it in 2017 already, see my gist from back then: gist.github.com/YaguraStation/1f707c9c0ebd666ca3e943c7eec8ad0c Also anapt-key list
on an affected machine should show that the keys only expire 2020.
– YaguraStation
9 hours ago
add a comment |
Cannot comment because of reputation.
It's the same of this question (10 mins of difference): https://askubuntu.com/questions/1133199/the-following-signatures-were-invalid-expkeysig-1397bc53640db551
Sort explanation: the GPG key on Google side expired, so you (we) have to wait.
I dont't think so, because they have renewed it in 2017 already, see my gist from back then: gist.github.com/YaguraStation/1f707c9c0ebd666ca3e943c7eec8ad0c Also anapt-key list
on an affected machine should show that the keys only expire 2020.
– YaguraStation
9 hours ago
add a comment |
Cannot comment because of reputation.
It's the same of this question (10 mins of difference): https://askubuntu.com/questions/1133199/the-following-signatures-were-invalid-expkeysig-1397bc53640db551
Sort explanation: the GPG key on Google side expired, so you (we) have to wait.
Cannot comment because of reputation.
It's the same of this question (10 mins of difference): https://askubuntu.com/questions/1133199/the-following-signatures-were-invalid-expkeysig-1397bc53640db551
Sort explanation: the GPG key on Google side expired, so you (we) have to wait.
answered 17 hours ago
herkilherkil
963
963
I dont't think so, because they have renewed it in 2017 already, see my gist from back then: gist.github.com/YaguraStation/1f707c9c0ebd666ca3e943c7eec8ad0c Also anapt-key list
on an affected machine should show that the keys only expire 2020.
– YaguraStation
9 hours ago
add a comment |
I dont't think so, because they have renewed it in 2017 already, see my gist from back then: gist.github.com/YaguraStation/1f707c9c0ebd666ca3e943c7eec8ad0c Also anapt-key list
on an affected machine should show that the keys only expire 2020.
– YaguraStation
9 hours ago
I dont't think so, because they have renewed it in 2017 already, see my gist from back then: gist.github.com/YaguraStation/1f707c9c0ebd666ca3e943c7eec8ad0c Also an
apt-key list
on an affected machine should show that the keys only expire 2020.– YaguraStation
9 hours ago
I dont't think so, because they have renewed it in 2017 already, see my gist from back then: gist.github.com/YaguraStation/1f707c9c0ebd666ca3e943c7eec8ad0c Also an
apt-key list
on an affected machine should show that the keys only expire 2020.– YaguraStation
9 hours ago
add a comment |
Plan 1
This is the protection you are getting from these checks. You don't
want to update your software right now while something is messed up on
Google's end. Wait until they fix it. Don't try to override by
reinstalling keys until some official word comes out that a new key is
the solution.
Plan 2
Waiting until they fix it may not be an option for all. E.g. this is
breaking CI pipelines for us. If you now what you are doing, you might
take the risk and disable checks for this repo for now by adding
[trusted=yes] to it's configuration: deb [trusted=yes]
http://dl.google.com/linux/chrome/deb/ stable main –
source
add a comment |
Plan 1
This is the protection you are getting from these checks. You don't
want to update your software right now while something is messed up on
Google's end. Wait until they fix it. Don't try to override by
reinstalling keys until some official word comes out that a new key is
the solution.
Plan 2
Waiting until they fix it may not be an option for all. E.g. this is
breaking CI pipelines for us. If you now what you are doing, you might
take the risk and disable checks for this repo for now by adding
[trusted=yes] to it's configuration: deb [trusted=yes]
http://dl.google.com/linux/chrome/deb/ stable main –
source
add a comment |
Plan 1
This is the protection you are getting from these checks. You don't
want to update your software right now while something is messed up on
Google's end. Wait until they fix it. Don't try to override by
reinstalling keys until some official word comes out that a new key is
the solution.
Plan 2
Waiting until they fix it may not be an option for all. E.g. this is
breaking CI pipelines for us. If you now what you are doing, you might
take the risk and disable checks for this repo for now by adding
[trusted=yes] to it's configuration: deb [trusted=yes]
http://dl.google.com/linux/chrome/deb/ stable main –
source
Plan 1
This is the protection you are getting from these checks. You don't
want to update your software right now while something is messed up on
Google's end. Wait until they fix it. Don't try to override by
reinstalling keys until some official word comes out that a new key is
the solution.
Plan 2
Waiting until they fix it may not be an option for all. E.g. this is
breaking CI pipelines for us. If you now what you are doing, you might
take the risk and disable checks for this repo for now by adding
[trusted=yes] to it's configuration: deb [trusted=yes]
http://dl.google.com/linux/chrome/deb/ stable main –
source
answered 8 hours ago
sxnsxn
10317
10317
add a comment |
add a comment |
apt-key adv --keyserver pgp.surfnet.nl --recv-key 0x7721F63BD38B4796
Add the above line after you fetch the key and it will work .This is the latest key
or use this :
RUN curl -o google.key.pub https://dl-ssl.google.com/linux/linux_signing_key.pub &&
apt-key add google.key.pub &&
rm -rf google.key.pub &&
echo "deb [arch=amd64, trusted=yes ] http://dl.google.com/linux/chrome/deb/ stable main" >> /etc/apt/sources.list.d/google.list &&
apt-get update -y | sed "/jessie-updates/d" /etc/apt/sources.list
3
No. No, this is not the right thing to do. Don't do this.
– wizzwizz4
10 hours ago
add a comment |
apt-key adv --keyserver pgp.surfnet.nl --recv-key 0x7721F63BD38B4796
Add the above line after you fetch the key and it will work .This is the latest key
or use this :
RUN curl -o google.key.pub https://dl-ssl.google.com/linux/linux_signing_key.pub &&
apt-key add google.key.pub &&
rm -rf google.key.pub &&
echo "deb [arch=amd64, trusted=yes ] http://dl.google.com/linux/chrome/deb/ stable main" >> /etc/apt/sources.list.d/google.list &&
apt-get update -y | sed "/jessie-updates/d" /etc/apt/sources.list
3
No. No, this is not the right thing to do. Don't do this.
– wizzwizz4
10 hours ago
add a comment |
apt-key adv --keyserver pgp.surfnet.nl --recv-key 0x7721F63BD38B4796
Add the above line after you fetch the key and it will work .This is the latest key
or use this :
RUN curl -o google.key.pub https://dl-ssl.google.com/linux/linux_signing_key.pub &&
apt-key add google.key.pub &&
rm -rf google.key.pub &&
echo "deb [arch=amd64, trusted=yes ] http://dl.google.com/linux/chrome/deb/ stable main" >> /etc/apt/sources.list.d/google.list &&
apt-get update -y | sed "/jessie-updates/d" /etc/apt/sources.list
apt-key adv --keyserver pgp.surfnet.nl --recv-key 0x7721F63BD38B4796
Add the above line after you fetch the key and it will work .This is the latest key
or use this :
RUN curl -o google.key.pub https://dl-ssl.google.com/linux/linux_signing_key.pub &&
apt-key add google.key.pub &&
rm -rf google.key.pub &&
echo "deb [arch=amd64, trusted=yes ] http://dl.google.com/linux/chrome/deb/ stable main" >> /etc/apt/sources.list.d/google.list &&
apt-get update -y | sed "/jessie-updates/d" /etc/apt/sources.list
answered 11 hours ago
Dolly AgarwalDolly Agarwal
33
33
3
No. No, this is not the right thing to do. Don't do this.
– wizzwizz4
10 hours ago
add a comment |
3
No. No, this is not the right thing to do. Don't do this.
– wizzwizz4
10 hours ago
3
3
No. No, this is not the right thing to do. Don't do this.
– wizzwizz4
10 hours ago
No. No, this is not the right thing to do. Don't do this.
– wizzwizz4
10 hours ago
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f55647076%2fthe-repository-http-dl-google-com-linux-chrome-deb-stable-release-is-not-sig%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
I don't understand why Google makes it so difficult (partially impossible) to report bugs. I've found even Account-concerning Bugs last year and they didn't allow me in any form to contact them. So sad.
– DanFromGermany
17 hours ago
Have you tried contacting
linux-packages-keymaster@google.com
?– DanFromGermany
17 hours ago
I have the exact same GPG error. Maybe Google messed something up signing their latest updates?
– Panni
17 hours ago
1
this question has a better title yet I see duplicate over at askubuntu.com/questions/1133199/… ... possible solution is to comment out its normal install you show above and manually copy over a previous install of google
– Scott Stensland
13 hours ago
1
@DanFromGermany I have contacted
linux-packages-keymaster@google.com
now. Let's see if I get any response (I have pretty low confidence though)– moritz
12 hours ago