From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2012 15:56:22 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Perform cheaper connectivity check when pack is used as medium
Message-ID: <7vfwdlvi3d.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <CACsJy8A+c6t_zHziPcQZ-Nw+fm0TmaG8VmDfnoPf-DzHHm8QVA@mail.gmail.com>

Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com> writes:

> On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 1:59 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
>> But now you brought it up, I think we may also need to worry about a
>> corrupt pre-existing loose blob object. In general, we tend to always
>> favor reading objects from packs over loose objects, but I do not know
>> offhand what repacking would do when there are two places it can read the
>> same object from (it should be allowed to pick whichever is easier to
>> read).
>
> Corrupt accidentally or on purpose?

Does not matter. The attack outlined does not require you to write a
corrupt one into victim's repository. You only need to _know_ one
that the victim happens to have.