From: Brandon Williams <bmwill@google.com>
To: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com>
Cc: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com>,
"git@vger.kernel.org" <git@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] receive-pack: verify push options in cert
Date: Fri, 5 May 2017 17:06:08 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170506000608.GD55152@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAGZ79ka4vG1yd1JtK9bDBjWPUG0UCPMvw2XQUsfX_e_xFCpVLA@mail.gmail.com>
On 05/05, Stefan Beller wrote:
> On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 4:46 PM, Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> wrote:
> > In commit f6a4e61 ("push: accept push options", 2016-07-14), send-pack
> > was taught to include push options both within the signed cert (if the
> > push is a signed push) and outside the signed cert; however,
> > receive-pack ignores push options within the cert, only handling push
> > options outside the cert.
> >
> > Teach receive-pack, in the case that push options are provided for a
> > signed push, to verify that the push options both within the cert and
> > outside the cert are consistent, and to provide the results of that
> > verification to the receive hooks as an environment variable (just like
> > it currently does for the nonce verification).
> >
> > This sets in stone the requirement that send-pack redundantly send its
> > push options in 2 places, but I think that this is better than the
> > alternatives. Sending push options only within the cert is
> > backwards-incompatible with existing Git servers (which read push
> > options only from outside the cert), and sending push options only
> > outside the cert means that the push options are not signed for.
>
> As the combination of push certs and push options are broken
> (at least when using JGit as well, which are used in Gerrit
> installations), I would not feel too bad about actually going
> the backwards-incompatible way.
yeah just think of the bits that could be saved!
But in all seriousness, I'd agree that doing the backwards-incompatible
way would be cleaner in the longer run (esp since they are broken
currently).
--
Brandon Williams
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-05-06 0:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-05-05 23:46 [PATCH 0/3] Clarify interaction between signed pushes and push options Jonathan Tan
2017-05-05 23:46 ` [PATCH 1/3] docs: correct receive.advertisePushOptions default Jonathan Tan
2017-05-05 23:50 ` Brandon Williams
2017-05-05 23:53 ` Stefan Beller
2017-05-05 23:58 ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-05-05 23:46 ` [PATCH 2/3] receive-pack: verify push options in cert Jonathan Tan
2017-05-06 0:02 ` Stefan Beller
2017-05-06 0:06 ` Brandon Williams [this message]
2017-05-06 0:20 ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-05-06 0:10 ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-05-05 23:46 ` [PATCH 3/3] protocol docs: explain receive-pack push options Jonathan Tan
2017-05-06 0:10 ` Stefan Beller
2017-05-06 0:26 ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-05-08 21:27 ` Jonathan Tan
2017-05-08 5:44 ` [PATCH 0/3] Clarify interaction between signed pushes and " Junio C Hamano
2017-05-08 21:33 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] " Jonathan Tan
2017-05-08 21:33 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] docs: correct receive.advertisePushOptions default Jonathan Tan
2017-05-08 21:33 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] receive-pack: verify push options in cert Jonathan Tan
2017-05-09 3:15 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-05-09 3:34 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-05-09 16:45 ` [PATCH] fixup! use perl instead of sed Jonathan Tan
2017-05-09 17:00 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2017-05-09 19:23 ` [PATCH v3 0/2] Clarify interaction between signed pushes and push options Jonathan Tan
2017-05-09 21:01 ` [PATCH v3] fixup! don't use perl -i because it's not portable Jonathan Tan
2017-05-09 19:23 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] docs: correct receive.advertisePushOptions default Jonathan Tan
2017-05-09 19:23 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] receive-pack: verify push options in cert Jonathan Tan
2017-05-09 20:43 ` [PATCH] fixup! use perl instead of sed Johannes Sixt
2017-05-09 21:04 ` Jonathan Tan
2017-05-09 21:08 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2017-05-09 22:38 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-05-09 23:44 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20170506000608.GD55152@google.com \
--to=bmwill@google.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=jonathantanmy@google.com \
--cc=sbeller@google.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).