Re: Gitorious should use CRC128 / 256 / 512 instead of SHA-1

From: Hans Petter Selasky <hps@selasky.org>
Date: Jan 13, 2023, 13:39 UTC
Message-ID: <446984f6-0d2e-04da-11a3-8b1481fac953@selasky.org>
In-Reply-To: <20230113133059.snyjblh3sz2wzcnd@carbon>

On 1/13/23 14:30, Konstantin Khomoutov wrote:

Show 10 quoted lines

> On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 01:59:44PM +0100, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
> 
>> Currently GIT only supports cryptographic hashes for its commit tags.
> [...]
> 
> https://github.com/git/git/blob/9bf691b78cf906751e65d65ba0c6ffdcd9a5a12c/Documentation/technical/hash-function-transition.txt
> 
> It's not clear why are you referring to Gitorious in your mail's subject and
> then talk about Git.
>

Hi,

I thought that Git was short for Gitorious? My bad.

The document you refer to really highlights my concerns, that a strong cryptographic hash algorithm is the highway to hell.

Do _not_ use a cryptographic hash for Git. Use plain good old CRC hashes.

Just imagine the consequences of finding child porn inside a 10-year old firmware binary blob in the Linux kernel. Will you just ignore it, or will you fix it?

That's why I say, that it must be possible to forge the hashes by default.

--HPS