Re: why is tagger header optional?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 10:09:46PM -0800, Shawn O. Pearce wrote:

> So why is it legal to omit the tagger header from a tag?
> 
> E.g. the Linux kernel tag v2.6.12 has no tagger header:

I think you just answered your own question. We must support tagger-less
tags because they exist in important projects like the kernel. :)

> [...]
> Is there a version of Git floating around that doesn't create a
> tagger header when creating a signed tag?  WTF?

Everything prior to c818566 ([PATCH] Update tags to record who made
them, 2005-07-14). So probably nothing that anybody is using now, but
v2.6.12 was one of the first tags made.

> Looking at tag.c's parse_tag_buffer(), the variable sig_line seems
> to be expected to point at the "tagger " header (given its name),
> but its not actually validated as such.

Actually, that variable name predates the patch above, so I suspect
"sig" meant "GPG signature". At any rate, as you can see, git doesn't
verify it, and the code for "git show v2.6.12" in
builtin-log.c:show_object handles the taggerless case as well. I don't
think anything else actually looks at the tagger. verify-tag treats the
signed data as opaque, and just shows the identity of the actual signer.

-Peff
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]