Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Git braindump: 1 of N: merging & git signing
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2012 14:49:19
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Git braindump: 1 of N: merging & git signing by Dirkjan Ochtman
On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 10:26 AM, Dirkjan Ochtman <djc@g.o> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 4:18 PM, Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o> wrote: >> How do you KNOW that the nearest signed descendant actually merged it? >> >> How do you know it wasn't added by a hacker? > > Because then the signature for the nearest signed descendant wouldn't > check out (unless it got hacked before he signed it, of course, but in > that case hopefully he wouldn't sign it...).
When I do a cvs commit, I don't check the logs to make sure the last 25 commits all look valid. So, why would I expect others to do any differently in git. I make my changes, I run a git pull (bringing in the hacked commit on gentoo-x86 master), and then merge/rebase in my changes, signing my commit (which indicates that what _I_ just commited is good, not that everything before is good). I am not the one commiting in hacked files - they were there before I got there.
> > Of course, we'd have to make sure the tip of whatever is pushed is > always signed, but the hook for that should be trivial.
Yup, but the hacker wouldn't run the hook. Rich


Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] Git braindump: 1 of N: merging & git signing Dirkjan Ochtman <djc@g.o>