From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp0 ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms11 with LMTPS id 0KTEFg2Lxl62SgAA0tVLHw (envelope-from ) for ; Thu, 21 May 2020 14:07:09 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp0 with LMTPS id EIunEg2Lxl4hFwAA1q6Kng (envelope-from ) for ; Thu, 21 May 2020 14:07:09 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E1D6E9404E0 for ; Thu, 21 May 2020 14:07:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:52260 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jblql-0007cg-O1 for larch@yhetil.org; Thu, 21 May 2020 10:07:07 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:59864) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jblqg-0007ZE-Vh for guix-patches@gnu.org; Thu, 21 May 2020 10:07:02 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:45490) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jblqg-0003jP-Mm for guix-patches@gnu.org; Thu, 21 May 2020 10:07:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1jblqg-0003WZ-HD for guix-patches@gnu.org; Thu, 21 May 2020 10:07:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: [bug#41425] [PATCH 0/5] Have 'guix pull' protect against downgrade attacks Resent-From: zimoun Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: guix-patches@gnu.org Resent-Date: Thu, 21 May 2020 14:07:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 41425 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix-patches X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch To: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= Cc: 41425@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 41425-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B41425.159007000613517 (code B ref 41425); Thu, 21 May 2020 14:07:02 +0000 Received: (at 41425) by debbugs.gnu.org; 21 May 2020 14:06:46 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:57036 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1jblqQ-0003Vx-4p for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 21 May 2020 10:06:46 -0400 Received: from mail-qt1-f196.google.com ([209.85.160.196]:35543) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1jblqO-0003Vj-Tk for 41425@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 21 May 2020 10:06:45 -0400 Received: by mail-qt1-f196.google.com with SMTP id z18so5561108qto.2 for <41425@debbugs.gnu.org>; Thu, 21 May 2020 07:06:44 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=aYkHAy45kr9luAkTZt1RMcOmKTYdmkq9pjMSu518LuU=; b=QhReLDTCjqZzg+RwFK94mnmC9S4YseqMqe+hcY5FryEcRl9WKM7YM6geTIfEmzr6cv MT3dk0gt4CLzgOqmEq6BzjOV5HSghAtINGwHHp/IFxBxOwKYT/6dHpEYbRBEaRCI5xlj QxH52KGl/7jIjdb7QCqO/BL01dmVe1otG3UuR8gfEd8zT/dGCtChhvAReb74OzZ2cqAK HN/OYPoeeVZ7Zn/aliP3Yv5Y+felcUawcIDiiWtI2b2ABwrb04uymYlJ2ahVDSUijArx bbFJJgwUuRx8+8Sx4+9NpxnLdhLisPJXqzLYH1ZXCZiFFMdGDcqgWfn7aFcKMUVxEUch fW8w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=aYkHAy45kr9luAkTZt1RMcOmKTYdmkq9pjMSu518LuU=; b=cARiCBjU5JtUHeL70Y/fOAkGEGYCJ8ZmmgvrcA5TIqU4Oin0i3a4V7GaaUVGF3amVG TVn4yOOzw9uBRBuxSMTO3PRBuhf0IfN02jSLqehtX2Ud0RJphfa3TlkY8YHtdL2y1ilb grn2S8uP6y7DdOV5NNJISbD7D0vuRDEqGp8nJzqbzFnIRPX6WHLuYnsW/ZI7FJwt9uh+ WdbXjQRD2MO1QBUSk3yB/i9in2aGlDxLD91J3Ip6xP96AIGu71aDLQINmVDMBhe75wMv 5B3zanagbrfpd2+RR7Rg00MupYPMgbr6kkb8lDxlahQsIHq3uJ0BH2kD99stBg5ytRsP r36Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530k8idySsPG1ypc1uEwG+vrOHnkarB1OKy7eoUYymR+U/jN5jMs xk6kPM/TlYvp2QuOUgqa+WVQdBWopX9YraizAps= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyl6jhtWXMSSZiVb9JHeNb2O7M8wffDIcIurXfvdrpN6EC7DOKeARFHS2o/DDuj0lRzrsBOStKpSVm1zd/n/jc= X-Received: by 2002:aed:2062:: with SMTP id 89mr10416443qta.327.1590069999152; Thu, 21 May 2020 07:06:39 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200520213802.2170-1-ludo@gnu.org> In-Reply-To: <20200520213802.2170-1-ludo@gnu.org> From: zimoun Date: Thu, 21 May 2020 16:06:27 +0200 Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) X-BeenThere: guix-patches@gnu.org List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-patches" X-Scanner: scn0 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail (rsa verify failed) header.d=gmail.com header.s=20161025 header.b=QhReLDTC; dmarc=fail reason="SPF not aligned (relaxed)" header.from=gmail.com (policy=none); spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of guix-patches-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=guix-patches-bounces@gnu.org X-Spam-Score: 0.09 X-TUID: Qg7fWib2zmf9 Hi Ludo, On Wed, 20 May 2020 at 23:39, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s wrote: > By default =E2=80=98guix pull=E2=80=99 would now error out if the target = commit of a > channel is not a descendant of the currently-used commit, according to > the commit graph. There=E2=80=99s an option to bypass that. =E2=80=98gu= ix > time-machine=E2=80=99 behavior is unchanged though: it never complains. What is the extra time cost of such check? Well, it depends on the "distance" between the 2 commits and maybe the complexity of the graph -- it it not clear what happen for complex merge -- but say pulling once a month. It is not easy -- nor impossible -- to evaluate such cost at the level of "guix pull". And I failed to evaluate it using 'commit-relation' with "guix repl" -- Segmentation fault with commit c81457a5883ea43950eb2ecdcbb58a5b144bcd11 and 4bdf4182fe080c3409f6ef9b410146b67cfa2595; probably because I did used correctly the API. Well, what will be the timing impact of checking the "fast-fowardness"? All the best, simon