From: Troy Benjegerdes <hozer@hozed•org>
To: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd•org>
Cc: bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Reconsidering github
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2014 12:44:14 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140823174414.GT22640@nl.grid.coop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140823143215.GA18452@savin.petertodd.org>
On Sat, Aug 23, 2014 at 10:32:15AM -0400, Peter Todd wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 23, 2014 at 01:17:01AM -0500, Troy Benjegerdes wrote:
> > This is why I clone git to mercurial, which is generally designed around the
> > assumption that history is immutable. You can't rewrite blockchain history,
> > and we should not be re-writing (rebasing) commit history either.
>
> Git commits serve two purposes: recording public history and
> communication. While for the purpose of recording history immutable
> commits make sense, for the purpose of communicating to other developers
> what changes should be added to that history you *do* want the mutable
> commits that git's rebase functionality supports. Much like how
> university math classes essentially never teach calculus in the order it
> was developed, it is rare indeed for the way you happened to develop
> some functionality to be the best sequence of changes for other
> developers to understand why and what is being changed.
>
> Anyway, just because mercurial is designed around the assumption that
> commit history is immutable doesn't mean it actually is; an attacker can
> fake a series of mercurial commits just as easily as they can git
> commits. The only thing that protects against history rewriting is
> signed commits and timestamps.
What I would really like is a frontend and/or integration to Git/Mercurial that
uses Bitcoin transactions *as* the signature, which has the nice side effect of
providing timestamps backed by the full faith and credit of a billion dollar
blockchain. So what is the best way for me to stick both a git *and* a
mercurial identity hash into a bitcoin transaction? (which leads to point 2
below)
>
> > The problem with github is it's too tempting to look at the *web page*, which
> > is NOT pgp-signed, and hit the 'approve' button when you might have someone
> > in the middle approving an unsigned changeset because you're in a hurry to
> > get the latest new critical OpenSSL 0day security patch build released.
> >
> > We need multiple redundant 'master' repositories run by different people in
> > different jurisdictions that get updated on different schedules, and have all
> > of these people pay attention to operational security, and not just outsource
> > it all to github because it's convenient.
>
> The easiest and most useful way to achieve that would be to have a
> formal program of code review, perhaps on a per-release basis, that
> reviewed the diffs between the previous release and the new one. Master
> repos in this scenario are simply copies of the "master master" repo
> that someone has manually verified and signed-off on, with of course a
> PGP signature.
>
> If you feel like volunteering to maintain one of these repos, you may
> find my Litecoin v0.8.3.7 audit report to be a useful template:
>
> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=265582.0
I'm not interested in volunteer, I'm interested in getting paid, and the
best way I believe I can accomplish that is use *my* bitcoin address in a
signature-transaction of the code I've reviewed.
What is the advantage of PGP? Far more people have ECDSA public-private
keys than PGP keys.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Troy Benjegerdes 'da hozer' hozer@hozed•org
7 elements earth::water::air::fire::mind::spirit::soul grid.coop
Never pick a fight with someone who buys ink by the barrel,
nor try buy a hacker who makes money by the megahash
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-08-23 17:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-08-19 12:02 Jeff Garzik
2014-08-19 12:28 ` Dāvis Mosāns
2014-08-19 14:58 ` Wladimir
2014-08-20 1:26 ` Troy Benjegerdes
2014-08-20 1:34 ` Gregory Maxwell
2014-08-20 6:24 ` Wladimir
2014-08-20 14:16 ` Mike Hearn
2014-08-23 5:59 ` Troy Benjegerdes
2014-08-23 5:53 ` Troy Benjegerdes
2014-08-30 3:33 ` Odinn Cyberguerrilla
2014-08-19 15:44 ` Bryan Bishop
2014-08-19 17:04 ` Angel Leon
2014-08-19 18:54 ` Gregory Maxwell
2014-08-22 19:20 ` xor
2014-08-22 19:31 ` Angel Leon
2014-08-23 6:17 ` Troy Benjegerdes
2014-08-23 11:38 ` Pieter Wuille
2014-08-23 12:05 ` Drak
2014-08-23 15:56 ` Wladimir
2014-08-23 11:59 ` Angel Leon
2014-08-23 14:32 ` Peter Todd
2014-08-23 17:44 ` Troy Benjegerdes [this message]
2014-08-23 20:36 ` Paul Rabahy
2014-08-23 20:54 ` Gregory Maxwell
2014-08-23 22:45 ` Peter Todd
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20140823174414.GT22640@nl.grid.coop \
--to=hozer@hozed$(echo .)org \
--cc=bitcoin-development@lists$(echo .)sourceforge.net \
--cc=pete@petertodd$(echo .)org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox