Re: ACLs for GIT

[Sitaram Chamarty <sitaramc@gmail.com>]

On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 7:36 PM, Shawn Pearce <spearce@spearce.org> wrote:
> On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 05:08, Sitaram Chamarty <sitaramc@gmail.com> wrote:

> Yes. Or, he has a SHA-1 he suspects is a tree or blob and lists that
> in a tree he pushes to a branch he can write to. Now he can fetch that
> branch back, and obtain that object whose SHA-1 he has but whose
> contents he does not have.

Good point.  Not too hard too I guess, unlike this one:

> There is another attack that is incredibly improbable, but that JGit

[snipped lots of complicated stuff]

> assume this theoretical attack is too improbable to succeed. (And it
> is given what we know about SHA-1 today.)

IMO most of the theoretical attacks are just that.  They advance the
state of the art but I've not heard of any of them actually being used
in a real life scenario.  The sad fact is there are much weaker links
to be found if you look around and you don't need all this.

>> Having two repos is still the best plan ;-)
>
> Yes, but tell that to Gerrit Code Review users. They really use the
> branch ACL features. :-)

Interesting.  I do a fair amount of git consulting and training
(inhouse) and this has only come up once so far.  I haven't seen it as
being that common at all.