From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from fhigh-b3-smtp.messagingengine.com (fhigh-b3-smtp.messagingengine.com [202.12.124.154]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3E3FF2DC32D for ; Tue, 30 Dec 2025 00:37:50 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=202.12.124.154 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1767055074; cv=none; b=CPBHTnUb5/COB580gDLLtfDcYvwVbdH5K3vx9cjyAv5e9DI5ifoAc0Ru8p0ftmNTrW1FFwRlxbZqL10KAk5W88WNIIpxlfZugdrA9GMpihpqoJ8o0cMSpkCVQnmq6175L8AptdSjcK6ymrR8upCfmjgdDExrX48pQ8F5rRUuMg8= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1767055074; c=relaxed/simple; bh=XJxeaStoNICkTBMHiTEVULzZCBdQP+MidKlRuWL1reo=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=Jn9LueYWHfZJxmZHsaptbt7flcm97bVCG3ak2RtewcvIIjg0eUX5xe6Ynphz5+raXKtA9AHxlEsCdUd/n4zyo8pXXlZjAcZM0RLzvTO8PRqAKeRzzErI5pnPD2Mxq8q31NOn1NU8eUdOWYFAu9ZBs9WMe0kvkFqKLDKywbrbadI= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b=J39ScIix; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b=gO71Hl/k; arc=none smtp.client-ip=202.12.124.154 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="J39ScIix"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b="gO71Hl/k" Received: from phl-compute-02.internal (phl-compute-02.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailfhigh.stl.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD05E7A0098; Mon, 29 Dec 2025 19:37:47 -0500 (EST) Received: from phl-frontend-01 ([10.202.2.160]) by phl-compute-02.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 29 Dec 2025 19:37:47 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=cc :cc:content-type:content-type:date:date:from:from:in-reply-to :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject :subject:to:to; s=fm1; t=1767055067; x=1767141467; bh=H8gsWPE2A8 TtWB/Y7nU7REMiazFCOrdC9sJnPelHfm0=; b=J39ScIix/e1+gRx2HLmDvayK5y oZVIJjiAd2YTmB/PMS/k0cawRJ058olMZKQIfAeKOMuJ203FLiTOdDsXVMutYmW/ 7WruRO6Ix72Fd0w2WuAjeWUI3hP6WIWt1OqA3i0Ytsz4QsULgK7XAHOPwPkcYJGT kVEikhmIhuHkDNrJBLs7LZ7h/a2FCkyu0q9oayso8nZ33fFy934a5g+L0ANIvNhy 78EYIOK4QFxbmtzVWeG+S2CCksMOSq0uXzh/XA+HWFJQoH0nUwptZH5nXnkVHTok 4cBI0qSKgt58oLMfAQufxKXvxe/KvgjFAkGtEQxlXlRAqP8hEfsJxmcgtmiA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date :feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject:subject:to :to:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; t= 1767055067; x=1767141467; bh=H8gsWPE2A8TtWB/Y7nU7REMiazFCOrdC9sJ nPelHfm0=; b=gO71Hl/keaq/0mxsPnoF+OcpRPqiDoYA2ApOdEpN19h9mJBnkXM k5B9eiFj5gH4bUky9+rIw7AlfTAy8w9okKQol6mQ1IroZ7PyNgdWvxWMEEn7duiL p7epBV7ONlYCoQh/8URtUOUmJI26CdfN5YQxYYbZo8NwNOMAs98pp8Rl5NJQmSSZ LvUh4cOgjG3U03LRjtLB+hRUGTdxyZgrvwrD99FNbkH8GX7Uf9yVF6e0uXblHywV Qoz5dxFDa5D7eTycFGGobWuhMYkDkC3LCSVKSBCqH8WtJCIRor0jkWkcCiHiYHR8 PYwC83/nIRfMn+GPDo1AQay18ZI4ttrSJEw== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeefgedrtddtgdejkeeitdcutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecuuegr ihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenucfjug hrpefhvfevufgjfhffkfgfgggtsehttdertddtredtnecuhfhrohhmpefluhhnihhoucev ucfjrghmrghnohcuoehgihhtshhtvghrsehpohgsohigrdgtohhmqeenucggtffrrghtth gvrhhnpeefveetteejheeugeffledvteeiveffueefjeelueffteeigffgfedthfefieeg ieenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehgih htshhtvghrsehpohgsohigrdgtohhmpdhnsggprhgtphhtthhopeegpdhmohguvgepshhm thhpohhuthdprhgtphhtthhopehtrhhovghlshesthhhohhmshgvnhdrihhopdhrtghpth htohepghhithhgihhtghgrughgvghtsehgmhgrihhlrdgtohhmpdhrtghpthhtohepghhi thesvhhgvghrrdhkvghrnhgvlhdrohhrghdprhgtphhtthhopehgihhtshhtvghrsehpoh gsohigrdgtohhm X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: if26b431b:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Mon, 29 Dec 2025 19:37:46 -0500 (EST) From: Junio C Hamano To: "Troels Thomsen" Cc: "Troels Thomsen via GitGitGadget" , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] receive-pack: fix crash on out-of-namespace symref In-Reply-To: (Troels Thomsen's message of "Sun, 28 Dec 2025 17:26:45 +0100") References: Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2025 09:37:45 +0900 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain "Troels Thomsen" writes: > On Sun, Dec 28, 2025, at 15:57, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> Fixing crash is certainly a good thing, but when the namespace is >> segregated and receive-pack wants to get updates only within the >> given namespace, would presence of such a cross namespace symref >> cause updates outside the namespace through the symref, defeating >> the point of setting up a namespace in the first place? >> >> I am not objecting to the new behaviour, but am not sure if it is a >> sensible one. You _might_ be able to argue that an attempt to update >> underlying refs outside the namespace through such a symbolic ref >> should result in an error (i.e., a fix to the current crashing >> behaviour is to die in a controlled way). >> >> Thoughts? > > I think it's important that the symbolic ref needs to be explicitly > created on the receiving side. Yes, and that can cut both ways. In an ideal world without any end-users who make any mistakes, deliberate cross namespace symref may be a handy feature to break out of the namespace jail on purpose in a controlled way. But if the symref was made to point across the namespace boundary by mistake, catching it as a misconfiguration may be a crucial chance the user has to prevent it from turning into a security incident. And that is why I asked.