Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] setup.c: make bare repo discovery optional

From: Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com>
Date: May 16, 2022, 22:25 UTC
Message-ID: <YoLPQVAnOOX0AZ2v@nand.local>
In-Reply-To: <e5139922-9b74-ebfa-756c-629918e0456b@github.com>

On Mon, May 16, 2022 at 02:46:55PM -0400, Derrick Stolee wrote:

Show 23 quoted lines

> On 5/13/2022 7:37 PM, Glen Choo via GitGitGadget wrote:
> > From: Glen Choo <chooglen@google.com>
> >
> > Add a config variable, `discovery.bare`, that tells Git whether or not
> > it should work with the bare repository it has discovered i.e. Git will
> > die() if it discovers a bare repository, but it is not allowed by
> > `discovery.bare`. This only affects repository discovery, thus it has no
> > effect if discovery was not done (e.g. `--git-dir` was passed).
>
> > This config is an enum of:
> >
> > - ["always"|(unset)]: always recognize bare repositories (like Git does
> >   today)
> > - "never": never recognize bare repositories
> >
> > More values are expected to be added later, and the default is expected
> > to change (i.e. to something other than "always").
>
> I think it is fine to include the "never" option for users to opt-in to
> this super-protected state, but I want to make it very clear that we
> should never move to it as a new default. This phrasing of 'something
> other than "always"' is key, but it might be good to point out that
> "never" is very unlikely to be that default.

I am confused, then.

What does a user who has some legitimate (non-embedded) bare repositories do if they are skeptical of other bare repositories? I suspect the best answer we would be able to provide with these patches is "use `--git-dir`".

What happens to a user who has a combination of legitimate bare repositories, embedded bare repositories that they trust, and other embedded bare repositories that they don't?

As far as I can tell, our recommendation with these tools would be to:

  - run `git config --global discovery.bare never`, and
  - include `--git-dir=$(pwd)` in any git invocations in bare
    repositories that they do trust

This gets at my concerns from [1] and [2] (mostly [2], in this case) that we're trying to close the embedded bare repos problem with an overly broad solution, at the expense of usability.

I can't shake the feeling that something like I described towards the bottom of [2] would give you all of the security guarantees you're after without compromising on usability for non-embedded bare repositories.

I'm happy to explore this direction more myself if you don't want to. I would just much rather see us adopt an approach that doesn't break more use-cases than it has to if such a thing can be avoided.

I cannot endorse these patches as-is.

Thanks, Taylor

[1]: https://lore.kernel.org/git/Ylobp7sntKeWTLDX@nand.local/ [2]: https://lore.kernel.org/git/YnmKwLoQCorBnMe2@nand.local/