Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2019 21:37:06 -0400 From: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: Supporting git access via smart HTTPS protocol for musl-libc On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 08:17:26PM -0500, A. Wilcox wrote: > On 03/25/19 20:09, vlse wrote: > > Hello, > > > > Would musl-libc support git access via smart HTTPS protocol. > > As git man page says as well as stackoverflow site that using git protocol > > is fine for lan operations. > > But for internet git access, either ssh or https smart protocol use > > is necessary to prevent man in the middle attack. > > This is more an argument for signing commits so that they are > cryptographically provable. HTTPS is trivial to MITM, especially for > the kind of actors that would care enough to MITM musl at all. > > Threat models, people. The request is reasonable. HTTPS is *not* "trivial to MITM", and essentially impossible to do so without detection and a trail of responsibility, especially now that CT logs are a thing. However, until breaking sha1 (much worse than it's broken now) is practical, you can also verify authenticity of a git repo via "git fsck" and a known good source of the commit hash (e.g. cgit over https). > > Please consider giving secure git access. Also smart http/s protocol > > is way better than dumb protocol. It avoids downloading too much data > > again and also shows progress and stats. > > > There is absolutely no difference in transmitted data between the Git > protocol and the HTTP Git transport, other than the useless overhead of > HTTP messages, which actually skews favour towards the Git protocol. > Also, the Git protocol is in my experience much much faster. > > The Git transport definitely can show progress and stats, the same as > the HTTP transport: > > awilcox on gwyn [pts/18 Mon 25 20:13] ~: git clone > git://git.musl-libc.org/musl > Cloning into 'musl'... > remote: Counting objects: 31396, done. > remote: Compressing objects: 100% (12589/12589), done. > remote: Total 31396 (delta 22605), reused 25698 (delta 18440) > Receiving objects: 100% (31396/31396), 4.77 MiB | 3.17 MiB/s, done. > Resolving deltas: 100% (22605/22605), done. > > > (It did show the progress as it was downloading, but since I am on a > fairly fast link, I couldn't copy it.) > > Personally I would be okay with musl offering an HTTP(S) transport as an > option, but please do not take away the Git transport. It is much > faster in my experience. Every second wasted on stupid HTTP traffic is > a second of my life I can't get back. Of course the git transport won't be taken away. I'd like to add https support, but I'm not sure how to do it without a nasty bloated httpd that would increase server resource requirements by 1-2 orders of magnitude. If anyone knows a way to hook up thttpd to it, I'll give it a try. Rich
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.