DanConwayDev on Nostr: If everyone uses a centralised git server then it is generally a trusted one. The ...
If everyone uses a centralised git server then it is generally a trusted one. The centralised party may be obliged by a very powerful actor to push malicious commits to specific IP addresses as part of a targeted attack on a high value individual but I can point to an example of this happening. If it became public that this happened too often, it would come at a high reputational cost.
As we move away from highly centralised git servers operated by companies with a reputation to defend towards self-hosted servers or services by smaller and less know organisations, it becomes more likely that that the server could be actively malicious. our mantra is 'don't trust, verify' and our network is built on content being signed by their authors instead of a trusted third party. It there makes sense that maintainere sign repository state so we are just trusting the servers with our privacy, using the same trust model as the relays.
As we move away from highly centralised git servers operated by companies with a reputation to defend towards self-hosted servers or services by smaller and less know organisations, it becomes more likely that that the server could be actively malicious. our mantra is 'don't trust, verify' and our network is built on content being signed by their authors instead of a trusted third party. It there makes sense that maintainere sign repository state so we are just trusting the servers with our privacy, using the same trust model as the relays.