<!-- The first section "Release notes" is required if you want to have your release post blog MR auto generated. Currently in BETA, details on the **release post item generator** can be found in the handbook: https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/marketing/blog/release-posts/#release-post-item-generator and this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rfn9ebgTwKg. The next four sections: "Problem to solve", "Intended users", "User experience goal", and "Proposal", are strongly recommended in your first draft, while the rest of the sections can be filled out during the problem validation or breakdown phase. However, keep in mind that providing complete and relevant information early helps our product team validate the problem and start working on a solution. --> ### Release notes <!-- What is the problem and solution you're proposing? This content sets the overall vision for the feature and serves as the release notes that will populate in various places, including the [release post blog](https://about.gitlab.com/releases/categories/releases/) and [Gitlab project releases](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/releases). " --> ### Problem to solve <!-- What problem do we solve? Try to define the who/what/why of the opportunity as a user story. For example, "As a (who), I want (what), so I can (why/value)." --> Currently GitLab displays a separate line item for artifact signatures when listing out all job artifacts. This is highly problematic for several reasons: 1. The signature is not associated with the job artifact that is signed in any way. This makes it very difficult to identify which artifacts have been signed and which have not. 1. The signature displays as a separate line item, effectively doubling the number of artifacts that are listed. As a developer, I want to quickly be able to view which build artifacts are signed and verified so that I know whether I can trust those artifacts as safe to download. As a customer, I want to be able to easily view which artifacts are signed and verified so that I know I am getting a genuine build that has not been compromised. ### Intended users ### Proposal 1. This proposal will impact artifacts listed in all of the following locations: 1. The list of artifacts that is shown when visiting the [Merge Request page](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-examples/wayne-enterprises/wayne-financial/customer-web-portal/-/merge_requests/3) and when clicking the Download Artifacts icon in the pipeline MR widget. 1. The list of pipelines on the [Pipeline page](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-examples/wayne-enterprises/wayne-financial/customer-web-portal/-/pipelines) where artifacts can be downloaded. 1. The list of artifacts that is shown when visiting the [Pipeline tab of the Commit page](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-examples/wayne-enterprises/wayne-financial/customer-web-portal/-/commit/9b443f9637619cc2fb42d9a1fa4d125d90bf3c11/pipelines) and when clicking the Download Artifacts icon. 1. The list of artifacts that is shown on the [Artifacts page](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-examples/wayne-enterprises/wayne-financial/customer-web-portal/-/jobs/2936495664/artifacts/browse) for an individual job. 1. For all locations listed above, all signature files (`.sig`) will be examined to see which file they sign. If the file matches the filename of one of the other job artifacts, then the following will apply: 1. Users will will not see a separate line item for the signature file. Instead a badge or other visual indicator will appear next to the signed artifact and indicate whether the signature is `Invalid`, `Unverified`, or `Valid and Verified`. 1. Users will have the ability to view the signature details, including the metadata that is stored as part of the signature. 1. Users will have the ability to download the signature file itself. ### Designs ### Further details <!-- Include use cases, benefits, goals, or any other details that will help us understand the problem better. --> ### Permissions and Security <!-- What permissions are required to perform the described actions? Are they consistent with the existing permissions as documented for users, groups, and projects as appropriate? Is the proposed behavior consistent between the UI, API, and other access methods (e.g. email replies)? Consider adding checkboxes and expectations of users with certain levels of membership https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/user/permissions.html * [ ] Add expected impact to members with no access (0) * [ ] Add expected impact to Guest (10) members * [ ] Add expected impact to Reporter (20) members * [ ] Add expected impact to Developer (30) members * [ ] Add expected impact to Maintainer (40) members * [ ] Add expected impact to Owner (50) members --> ### Documentation <!-- See the Feature Change Documentation Workflow https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/development/documentation/workflow.html#for-a-product-change * Add all known Documentation Requirements in this section. See https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/development/documentation/feature-change-workflow.html#documentation-requirements * If this feature requires changing permissions, update the permissions document. See https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/user/permissions.html --> Documentation will be added and updated for this feature. ### Availability & Testing <!-- This section needs to be retained and filled in during the workflow planning breakdown phase of this feature proposal, if not earlier. What risks does this change pose to our availability? How might it affect the quality of the product? What additional test coverage or changes to tests will be needed? Will it require cross-browser testing? Please list the test areas (unit, integration and end-to-end) that needs to be added or updated to ensure that this feature will work as intended. Please use the list below as guidance. * Unit test changes * Integration test changes * End-to-end test change See the test engineering planning process and reach out to your counterpart Software Engineer in Test for assistance: https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/engineering/quality/test-engineering/#test-planning --> ### What does success look like, and how can we measure that? <!-- Define both the success metrics and acceptance criteria. Note that success metrics indicate the desired business outcomes, while acceptance criteria indicate when the solution is working correctly. If there is no way to measure success, link to an issue that will implement a way to measure this. --> ### What is the type of buyer? <!-- What is the buyer persona for this feature? See https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/marketing/product-marketing/roles-personas/buyer-persona/ In which enterprise tier should this feature go? See https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/product/pricing/#four-tiers --> ~"GitLab Free" ### Is this a cross-stage feature? <!-- Communicate if this change will affect multiple Stage Groups or product areas. We recommend always start with the assumption that a feature request will have an impact into another Group. Loop in the most relevant PM and Product Designer from that Group to provide strategic support to help align the Group's broader plan and vision, as well as to avoid UX and technical debt. https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/product/#cross-stage-features --> ### Links / references Related Epic: https://gitlab.com/groups/gitlab-org/-/epics/7856+ <!-- Label reminders - you should have one of each of the following labels if you can figure out the correct ones --> <!-- triage-serverless v3 PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE THIS SECTION --> *This page may contain information related to upcoming products, features and functionality. It is important to note that the information presented is for informational purposes only, so please do not rely on the information for purchasing or planning purposes. Just like with all projects, the items mentioned on the page are subject to change or delay, and the development, release, and timing of any products, features, or functionality remain at the sole discretion of GitLab Inc.* <!-- triage-serverless v3 PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE THIS SECTION -->