On Sat, Jan 19, 2008 at 12:26:44AM +0200, Alon Bar-Lev wrote: > On 1/18/08, Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Thursday 17 January 2008, Robin H. Johnson wrote: > > > anonvcs.gentoo.org: anoncvs, anonsvn, anongit > > > - Anonymous SVN is changing from http:// to svn:// [1] > > > overlays.gentoo.org [3]: > > > - Anonymous SVN is changing from http:// to svn:// > > i'd point out that http:// syncing is usable from behind firewalls while > > svn:// is not ... while this does not affect me personally, it's something > > to > > keep in mind. > > -mike > Just wanted to note this too... I am one of the affected ones... > I think that it is very important to have http, and even https for > formal resources. > git://, svn://, rsync:// or ssh+X:// are inaccessible for a large > group of users. My core concern with the SVN http://, was the crappy performance it provided compared to svn://. The main rsync tree has never been available for iterative syncing via http://, just had tarball snapshots and deltas instead.
> Also using none secured protocols, exposes users to man-in-the-middle attacks. The existing http:// had this problem already, it's not a new one. git:// and svn:// do both have patches around adding support for adding TLS. This however just adds overhead, I really need to finish the tree-signing work I was doing, as that protects the content better (MITM is still possible on SSL without it, just a lot harder as an attacker has to deal with the SSL stream first). -- Robin Hugh Johnson Gentoo Linux Developer & Infra Guy E-Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] GnuPG FP : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85
pgp8vJHeAJFgp.pgp
Description: PGP signature
