Re: Limited operations in unsafe repositories

[Jeff King <peff@peff.net>]

On Thu, Jan 11, 2024 at 08:17:14AM +0100, Patrick Steinhardt wrote:

> > Right, it's not config itself that's unsafe; it's that many options are.
> > We could try to annotate them to say "it is OK to parse core.eol but not
> > core.pager", presumably with an allow-known-good approach (since so many
> > ard bad!). But that feels like an ongoing maintenance headache, and an
> > easy way to make a mistake (your mention of terminal sequences makes me
> > assume you're thinking of "color.diff.*", etc). A rule like "we do not
> > read repo-level config at all" seems easier to explain (to me, anyway).
> 
> With the exemption of the repository format, I assume? We have to parse
> things like `core.repositoryFormatVersion` and extensions in order to
> figure out how a repository has to be accessed. So I agree that we
> should not partition config based on safeness, which is going to be a
> headache as you rightly point out. But we can partition based on whether
> or not config is required in order to access the repository, where the
> set of relevant config keys is a whole lot smaller.

Right. See the pseudo-patch I posted earlier. I think we just want to
touch do_git_config_sequence(), which leaves repo discovery and stuff
like "git config --local" working.

-Peff