Re: commit-message attack for extracting sensitive data from rewritten Git history

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

 



Am 4/8/2013 23:54, schrieb Jeff King:
> 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--o

If A mentions B (think of cherry-pick -x), then you must ensure that the
branch containing B was traversed first.

-- Hannes
--
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]