[17:28] <teward> wgrant: cjwatson: wasn't there a bug open on LP for updating PPA GPG keys to 2048+ for older 1024 RSA keys?
[17:28] <teward> cc tomreyn
[17:28] <teward> i coulda sworn there was a while ago but the proper migration mechanism or regen mechanism for many of the PPAs was not yet thought out not to mention the amount of things that could break for PPA users with signatures and keymismatches
[17:30] <cjwatson> yes, there is such a bug.
[17:30] <teward> cjwatson: can we have a link to it so I can hand it to tomreyn who brought upt he issue in #ubuntu-hardened?
[17:31] <teward> (regarding the security team's proposed ppa)
[17:31] <cjwatson> can you please search?
[17:31] <teward> i can TRY if the search wasn't timing out
[17:31] <cjwatson> working fine for me
[17:31] <cjwatson> search bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad for ppa key, first hit
[17:32] <cjwatson> I really want to discourage people using me as a search engine when the computer-based one works :)
[17:32] <teward> yep found 3 of them this time.
[17:32] <teward> cjwatson: LP timed out on the first search, but it worked on the 2nd
[17:32] <teward> LP just doesn't like me it seems
[17:34]  * cjwatson sighs
[17:34] <teward> got them though.
[17:34] <teward> *returns to poking around his PPAs*
[18:25] <teward> i assume it's possible to get a key regenerated by request for my PPAs, right?  Since I'm not a fan of my old name or those 1024bit keys :P
[20:13] <cjwatson> teward: we have no process for that
[20:13] <cjwatson> AFAIK it has never been done
[20:18] <teward> makes sense.
[20:18] <teward> given that the comments on #1331914 even indicate that the functionality is still even in the 'draft' stages of trying to consider how it'd work that makes sense.