I've been using git for a while and really like it, but I have a concern about security. As I understand it, none of the repository backends allow any per-user per-branch access control. SSH and HTTP come the closest with the right hooks, but since the repository is writeable by those users, there is little to stop them from changing the repository directly. If this is truly the case, I was thinking of creating something similar to SVN's Apache plugin to provide more sophisticated access control. I'm leaning toward the HTTP remote (transport? backend? What's the right term?) because Apache can do many kinds of authentication. I could also make the HTTP less dumb, if I had a better idea what that might involve. This could also be a way to solve the requests for remote repository creation I see in the survey. So, before I start, I would like to get ideas from others...or be told this is a waste of time. Thanks. -- --Andre Masella (andre at masella.no-ip.org) - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
| Ryan Hope | reiser4 for 2.6.27-rc1 |
| hooanon05 | [PATCH 63/67] aufs mount helper |
| Rafael J. Wysocki | 2.6.26-rc9-git12: Reported regressions from 2.6.25 |
| Peter Zijlstra | Re: [ANNOUNCE] mdb: Merkey's Linux Kernel Debugger 2.6.27-rc4 released |
git: | |
| Ken Pratt | pack operation is thrashing my server |
| しらいしななこ | [PATCH] Update Japanese translation |
| Christian Couder | [PATCH] Documentation: help: explain 'man.viewer' multiple values |
| Dennis Schridde | Odd number of elements in anonymous hash |
| GVG GVG | ssh_exchange_identification: Connection closed by remote host |
| Chris | avoid logging useless ssh brute force attempts |
| Ray Percival | Re: Real men don't attack straw men |
| Marius ROMAN | 1440x900 resolution problem |
| Jim Winstead Jr. | Re: Root Disk/Book Disk Compatibility |
| Doug Evans | Re: Stabilizing Linux |
| Stephen Pierce | SLS |
| Mark Evans | Re: Possible bug in TCP/IP stuff of kernel (0.99p5 on up). |
