From: Avery Pennarun <apenwarr@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 05 Mar 2010 03:19:13 GMT
Subject: Re: Question about scm security holes
Message-ID: <32541b131003041919u6a477b46s447a6aeb18f3b393@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <43d8ce651003041900x66000be4s9a15ab0cde3a0fe7@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 10:00 PM, John Tapsell <johnflux@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5 March 2010 02:03, Avery Pennarun <apenwarr@gmail.com> wrote:
>> modified code would be a little more interesting.  git makes this sort
>> of thing pretty much impossible to do without it being *noticeable* at
>> least.  Traceable, not so much, because you can create a commit with
>> whatever committer/author names you want and then push them in.
>
> Which is why you simply record the username of whoever pushed them in.
>  This is what gitorious.org does etc.

Not bad, but it's still very hard to trace properly.  Imagine I pull
from a peer, then push my combined branch into the central repo.
It'll say I'm pushing in patches from me *and* my friend.  Did I forge
them or are they real?

Avery