[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: Check SHA vs Content (was: RE: svn commit: r1759233 - /subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_wc/questions.c)

From: Johan Corveleyn <jcorvel_at_gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 9 May 2017 13:21:36 +0200

On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 11:33 AM, Stefan Sperling <stsp_at_elego.de> wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 09:05:25AM +0100, Bert Huijben wrote:
>> This code is still in trunk without any of the discussed improvements, so
>> this change is currently part of 1.10.0-alpha1.
>> If we don't implement the improvements I think we should check if we want
>> to revert to the 1.0-1.9 behavior before we really look at releasing 1.10.
>> See discussion below
>> Bert
> I think the proposed approach as implemented on trunk can no longer be
> considered viable, unfortunately, because of this step:
>> > >>> 4. Calculate SHA-1 checksum of detranslated contents of working file
>> > >>> and compare it with pristine's checksum stored in wc.db.
> Given that the SHA1 collision problem is real, we are now trying to stop
> relying on hashes to compare content. So it does not make sense to add
> new code which relies on hashes in this way, in my opinion.
> It seems that using SHA1 to compare content is key to the proposed approach.
> If that is correct, then I don't agree with releasing 1.10 with this feature
> and I would be in favour of reverting this change.
> Ivan, do you have any further comments on this thread? You have remained
> silent for quite some time now :(

Where are we with this? Seems the consensus is to revert r1759233 to
not further increase our reliance on sha1? Or is there still a way to
keep r1759233 in some way, and improve it to make the sha1 test
"sensitive but not specific", like danielsh proposed?


Received on 2017-05-09 13:22:09 CEST

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.