monotone-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: Using monotone in a team


From: hendrik
Subject: Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: Using monotone in a team
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2006 11:32:46 -0500
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.9i

On Thu, Nov 30, 2006 at 12:24:27AM -0600, Timothy Brownawell wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-11-30 at 17:06 +1100, Brian May wrote:
> > >>>>> "Daniel" == Daniel Carosone <address@hidden> writes:
> > 
> >     Daniel> Again, it's not about permissions to change things, it's
> >     Daniel> about whether your trust (ie, how you pay attention to)
> >     Daniel> what they do.
> > 
> >     Daniel> In this context, this means that everyone accepts changes
> >     Daniel> in the junior branch from junior and denior developers,
> >     Daniel> and in the main branch only from the senior developers.
> >     Daniel> More specifically, that I only trust main-branch certs
> >     Daniel> signed by senior developers.
> > 
> >     Daniel> From time to time, a senior developer looks at revs in the
> >     Daniel> junior branch.
> > 
> > What happens if a trusted developer's key becomes compromised
> > (e.g. laptop stolen) or the developer becomes untrustworthy
> > (e.g. fired)?
> > 
> > Can you somehow say that old signatures are still valid, but new ones
> > aren't?
> 
> Define "new" (monotone has no concept of time).

Except for a partial order of revisions after other revisions.  You 
could still give a list of recent valid revisions and let the partial 
order fend a lot of older revisions whose certs would also be valid.

> 
> The only way we really have is to take some other key (quite possibly
> specially generated for this, and then never used again), and reproduce
> all the certs that you do want to trust. (Well, you *could* give the
> trust hooks a list of all the known-good certs, but that gets really
> ridiculous really fast.)
> 
> > Hmm. Need to think about this more.
> > 
> > Having every certificate contain a time and date stamp would be a good
> > start - but then you have to trust the computer clock that creates
> > every signature.
> 
> Which has historically been enough for us to discard this idea as
> unworkable.
> 
> -- 
> Timothy
> 
> Free (experimental) public monotone hosting: http://mtn-host.prjek.net
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Monotone-devel mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]