archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Phillip Wood <>
To: "Jeff King" <>,
	"brian m. carlson" <>,
	"Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason" <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/1] Hashed mailmap support
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2020 11:15:06 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <>

Hi Peff, Ævar, Brian

On 15/12/2020 01:48, Jeff King wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 13, 2020 at 01:05:38AM +0000, brian m. carlson wrote:
>> Note that this is not perfect, because a user can simply look up all the
>> hashed values and find out the old values.  However, for projects which
>> wish to adopt the feature, it can be somewhat effective to hash all
>> existing mailmap entries and include some no-op entries from other
>> contributors as well, so as to make this process less convenient.
> I remain unconvinced of the value of any noop entries. Ultimately it's
> easy to invert a one-way hash that comes from a small known set of
> inputs. And that's true whether there are extra noops or not.
> The interesting argument IMHO is that somebody has to _bother_ to invert
> the hash. So it means that the old and new identities do not show up
> next to each other in a file indexed by search engines, etc. That drops
> the low-hanging fruit.
> And from that argument, I think the obvious question becomes: is it
> worth using a real one-way function, as opposed to just obscuring the
> raw bytes (which Ævar went into in more detail). I don't have a strong
> opinion either way (the obvious one in favor is that it's less expensive
> to do so; and something like "git log" will have to either compute a lot
> of these hashes, or cache the hash computations internally).
> I think somebody also mentioned that there's value in the social
> signaling here, and I agree with that. But that is true even for a
> reversible encoding, I think.

 From an obscurity point of view one possible advantage of using a 
one-way function as opposed to just obscuring the raw bytes with a 
reversible encoding is that looking up an old identity requires someone 
to have both the .mailmap and the repository, they cannot get the old 
identities by just downloading the .mailmap file. (I think this the same 
argument as Ævar makes in favor of a reversible encoding as the .mailmap 
file has other uses)

Best Wishes


> -Peff

  parent reply	other threads:[~2020-12-15 11:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-12-13  1:05 [PATCH 0/1] Hashed mailmap support brian m. carlson
2020-12-13  1:05 ` [PATCH 1/1] mailmap: support hashed entries in mailmaps brian m. carlson
2020-12-13  9:34   ` Johannes Sixt
2020-12-13  9:45     ` Johannes Sixt
2020-12-13 20:38       ` brian m. carlson
2020-12-14  0:09   ` Junio C Hamano
2020-12-16  0:50     ` brian m. carlson
2020-12-14 11:54   ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2020-12-15 11:13   ` Phillip Wood
2020-12-15  1:48 ` [PATCH 0/1] Hashed mailmap support Jeff King
2020-12-15  2:40   ` Jeff King
2020-12-15 11:15   ` Phillip Wood [this message]
2020-12-18  2:29   ` brian m. carlson
2020-12-18  5:56     ` Jeff King

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).