From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andre Masella Subject: Repository Security Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2007 14:33:11 -0500 Message-ID: <200701221433.13257.andre@masella.no-ip.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Jan 22 20:54:02 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1H95Ev-0001Dd-IU for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Mon, 22 Jan 2007 20:54:01 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932410AbXAVTx6 (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Jan 2007 14:53:58 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932414AbXAVTx6 (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Jan 2007 14:53:58 -0500 Received: from toq12-srv.bellnexxia.net ([209.226.175.119]:51011 "EHLO toq12-srv.bellnexxia.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932410AbXAVTx6 (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Jan 2007 14:53:58 -0500 X-Greylist: delayed 1240 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Mon, 22 Jan 2007 14:53:57 EST Received: from masella.no-ip.org ([74.14.39.184]) by tomts10-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.06.13 201-253-122-130-113-20050324) with ESMTP id <20070122193316.ITBB17401.tomts10-srv.bellnexxia.net@masella.no-ip.org> for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2007 14:33:16 -0500 Received: by masella.no-ip.org (Postfix, from userid 1003) id DAD535034C; Mon, 22 Jan 2007 14:33:14 -0500 (EST) To: git@vger.kernel.org User-Agent: KMail/1.9.5 Content-Disposition: inline Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: I've been using git for a while and really like it, but I have a concern about security. As I understand it, none of the repository backends allow any per-user per-branch access control. SSH and HTTP come the closest with the right hooks, but since the repository is writeable by those users, there is little to stop them from changing the repository directly. If this is truly the case, I was thinking of creating something similar to SVN's Apache plugin to provide more sophisticated access control. I'm leaning toward the HTTP remote (transport? backend? What's the right term?) because Apache can do many kinds of authentication. I could also make the HTTP less dumb, if I had a better idea what that might involve. This could also be a way to solve the requests for remote repository creation I see in the survey. So, before I start, I would like to get ideas from others...or be told this is a waste of time. Thanks. -- --Andre Masella (andre at masella.no-ip.org)