Re: commit-message attack for extracting sensitive data from rewritten Git history
- From
Johannes Sixt <j.sixt@viscovery.net>
- Date
- Apr 9, 2013, 06:03 UTC
- Message-ID
- <5163AF2C.2020107@viscovery.net>
- In-Reply-To
- <20130408215457.GB11227@sigill.intra.peff.net>
Am 4/8/2013 23:54, schrieb Jeff King:
Show 6 quoted lines
> Yeah, it would make sense for filter-branch to have a "--map-commit-ids" > option or similar that does the update. At first I thought it might take > two passes, but I don't think it is necessary, as long as we traverse > the commits topologically (i.e., you cannot have mentioned X in a commit > that is an ancestor of X, so you do not have to worry about mapping it > until after it has been processed).
Topological traversal is not sufficient. Consider this history:
o--A--o--
/ /
--o--B--oIf A mentions B (think of cherry-pick -x), then you must ensure that the branch containing B was traversed first.
-- Hannes