| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
|---|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Add a new flag --sign=true (or --sign=false), which means the same
thing as the original --signed (or --no-signed). Give it a third
value --sign=if-asked to tell push and send-pack to send a push
certificate if and only if the server advertised a push cert nonce.
If not, warn the user that their push may not be as secure as they
thought.
Signed-off-by: Dave Borowitz <dborowitz@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This adds support to send-pack to negotiate and use atomic pushes
iff the server supports it. Atomic pushes are activated by a new command
line flag --atomic.
In order to do this we also need to change the semantics for send_pack()
slightly. The existing send_pack() function actually doesn't send all the
refs back to the server when multiple refs are involved, for example
when using --all. Several of the failure modes for pushes can already be
detected locally in the send_pack client based on the information from the
initial server side list of all the refs as generated by receive-pack.
Any such refs that we thus know would fail to push are thus pruned from
the list of refs we send to the server to update.
For atomic pushes, we have to deal thus with both failures that are detected
locally as well as failures that are reported back from the server. In order
to do so we treat all local failures as push failures too.
We introduce a new status code REF_STATUS_ATOMIC_PUSH_FAILED so we can
flag all refs that we would normally have tried to push to the server
but we did not due to local failures. This is to improve the error message
back to the end user to flag that "these refs failed to update since the
atomic push operation failed."
Signed-off-by: Ronnie Sahlberg <sahlberg@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Record the URL of the intended recipient for a push (after
anonymizing it if it has authentication material) on a new "pushee
URL" header. Because the networking configuration (SSH-tunnels,
proxies, etc.) on the pushing user's side varies, the receiving
repository may not know the single canonical URL all the pushing
users would refer it as (besides, many sites allow pushing over
ssh://host/path and https://host/path protocols to the same
repository but with different local part of the path). So this
value may not be reliably used for replay-attack prevention
purposes, but this will still serve as a human readable hint to
identify the repository the certificate refers to.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
While signed tags and commits assert that the objects thusly signed
came from you, who signed these objects, there is not a good way to
assert that you wanted to have a particular object at the tip of a
particular branch. My signing v2.0.1 tag only means I want to call
the version v2.0.1, and it does not mean I want to push it out to my
'master' branch---it is likely that I only want it in 'maint', so
the signature on the object alone is insufficient.
The only assurance to you that 'maint' points at what I wanted to
place there comes from your trust on the hosting site and my
authentication with it, which cannot easily audited later.
Introduce a mechanism that allows you to sign a "push certificate"
(for the lack of better name) every time you push, asserting that
what object you are pushing to update which ref that used to point
at what other object. Think of it as a cryptographic protection for
ref updates, similar to signed tags/commits but working on an
orthogonal axis.
The basic flow based on this mechanism goes like this:
1. You push out your work with "git push --signed".
2. The sending side learns where the remote refs are as usual,
together with what protocol extension the receiving end
supports. If the receiving end does not advertise the protocol
extension "push-cert", an attempt to "git push --signed" fails.
Otherwise, a text file, that looks like the following, is
prepared in core:
certificate version 0.1
pusher Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> 1315427886 -0700
7339ca65... 21580ecb... refs/heads/master
3793ac56... 12850bec... refs/heads/next
The file begins with a few header lines, which may grow as we
gain more experience. The 'pusher' header records the name of
the signer (the value of user.signingkey configuration variable,
falling back to GIT_COMMITTER_{NAME|EMAIL}) and the time of the
certificate generation. After the header, a blank line follows,
followed by a copy of the protocol message lines.
Each line shows the old and the new object name at the tip of
the ref this push tries to update, in the way identical to how
the underlying "git push" protocol exchange tells the ref
updates to the receiving end (by recording the "old" object
name, the push certificate also protects against replaying). It
is expected that new command packet types other than the
old-new-refname kind will be included in push certificate in the
same way as would appear in the plain vanilla command packets in
unsigned pushes.
The user then is asked to sign this push certificate using GPG,
formatted in a way similar to how signed tag objects are signed,
and the result is sent to the other side (i.e. receive-pack).
In the protocol exchange, this step comes immediately before the
sender tells what the result of the push should be, which in
turn comes before it sends the pack data.
3. When the receiving end sees a push certificate, the certificate
is written out as a blob. The pre-receive hook can learn about
the certificate by checking GIT_PUSH_CERT environment variable,
which, if present, tells the object name of this blob, and make
the decision to allow or reject this push. Additionally, the
post-receive hook can also look at the certificate, which may be
a good place to log all the received certificates for later
audits.
Because a push certificate carry the same information as the usual
command packets in the protocol exchange, we can omit the latter
when a push certificate is in use and reduce the protocol overhead.
This however is not included in this patch to make it easier to
review (in other words, the series at this step should never be
released without the remainder of the series, as it implements an
interim protocol that will be incompatible with the final one).
As such, the documentation update for the protocol is left out of
this step.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The latter can do everything the former can and is used in many more
places.
Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
When pushing via builtin transports (like file://, git://), the
underlying transport helper (in this case, git-pack-objects) did not get
the --progress option, even if it was passed to git push.
Fix this, and update the tests to reflect this.
Note that according to the git-pack-objects documentation, we can safely
apply the usual --progress semantics for the transport commands like
clone and fetch (and for pushing over other smart transports).
Reported-by: Chase Brammer <cbrammer@gmail.com>
Helped-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Tay Ray Chuan <rctay89@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The script calling git push --porcelain --dry-run can see clearly from the
output if an update was rejected. However, it will probably need to distinguish
this condition from the push failing for other reasons, such as the remote not
being reachable.
This patch modifies git push --porcelain to print "Done" after the rest of its
output unless any errors have occurred. For the purpose of the "Done" line,
knowing a ref will be rejected in a --dry-run does not count as an error.
Actual rejections in non --dry-run pushes do count as errors.
Signed-off-by: Larry D'Anna <larry@elder-gods.org>
Acked-by: Tay Ray Chuan <rctay89@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The git-remote-curl backend detects if the remote server supports
the git-receive-pack service, and if so, runs git-send-pack in a
pipe to dump the command and pack data as a single POST request.
The advertisements from the server that were obtained during the
discovery are passed into git-send-pack before the POST request
starts. This permits git-send-pack to operate largely unmodified.
For smaller packs (those under 1 MiB) a HTTP/1.0 POST with a
Content-Length is used, permitting interaction with any server.
The 1 MiB limit is arbitrary, but is sufficent to fit most deltas
created by human authors against text sources with the occasional
small binary file (e.g. few KiB icon image). The configuration
option http.postBuffer can be used to increase (or shink) this
buffer if the default is not sufficient.
For larger packs which cannot be spooled entirely into the helper's
memory space (due to http.postBuffer being too small), the POST
request requires HTTP/1.1 and sets "Transfer-Encoding: chunked".
This permits the client to upload an unknown amount of data in one
HTTP transaction without needing to pregenerate the entire pack
file locally.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
CC: Daniel Barkalow <barkalow@iabervon.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
When pushing over the git protocol, pack-objects gives
progress reports about the pack being sent. If "push" is
given the --quiet flag, it now passes "-q" to pack-objects,
suppressing this output.
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The fetching of OFS_DELTA objects has been negotiated between both peers
since git version 1.4.4. However, this was missing from the push side
where every OFS_DELTA objects were always converted to REF_DELTA objects
causing an increase in transferred data.
To fix this, both the client and the server processes have to be
modified: the former to invoke pack-objects with --delta-base-offset
when the server provides the ofs-delta capability, and the later to send
that capability when OFS_DELTA objects are allowed as already indicated
by the repack.usedeltabaseoffset config variable which is TRUE by
default since git v1.6.0.
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
For native-protocol pushes (and other protocols as they are converted
to the new method), this moves the refspec match, tracking update, and
report message out of send-pack() and into transport_push(), where it
can be shared completely with other protocols. This also makes fetch
and push more similar in terms of what code is in what file.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Barkalow <barkalow@iabervon.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Existing "git push --all" is almost perfect for backing up to
another repository, except that "--all" only means "all
branches" in modern git, and it does not delete old branches and
tags that exist at the back-up repository that you have removed
from your local repository.
This teaches "git-send-pack" a new "--mirror" option. The
difference from the "--all" option are that (1) it sends all
refs, not just branches, and (2) it deletes old refs you no
longer have on the local side from the remote side.
Original patch by Junio C Hamano.
Signed-off-by: Andy Whitcroft <apw@shadowen.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
|
|
|
Also marks some more things as const, as needed.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Barkalow <barkalow@iabervon.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
|
