Skip to content

Conversation

gammazero
Copy link
Contributor

@gammazero gammazero commented Aug 26, 2025

Closes kubo issue ipfs/kubo#8703

This will close kubo issue ipfs/kubo#8703 when the kubo PR with this update is merged.
@gammazero gammazero requested a review from a team as a code owner August 26, 2025 05:56
Copy link

codecov bot commented Aug 26, 2025

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 60.50%. Comparing base (30868de) to head (3017543).
⚠️ Report is 22 commits behind head on main.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1013      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   60.47%   60.50%   +0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         267      267              
  Lines       33276    33277       +1     
==========================================
+ Hits        20124    20133       +9     
+ Misses      11485    11479       -6     
+ Partials     1667     1665       -2     
Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
verifcid/allowlist.go 68.00% <100.00%> (+1.33%) ⬆️

... and 9 files with indirect coverage changes

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@gammazero gammazero added the status/blocked Unable to be worked further until needs are met label Aug 26, 2025
@gammazero
Copy link
Contributor Author

Still needed for git compatibility.

  • Blocked until git 3 is released

Copy link
Member

@lidel lidel left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

SHA1 creates interesting question: what do we do with hash functions which are no longer considered secure, but there are DAGs created with it. i imagine we want to retain ability to read historical DAGS, but not create new ones?

It feels what we want here, is to have separate allowlist for reading (and sha1 would be allowed, due to historical use in Git DAGs), and separate for writing (we would refuse to create new dags with sha1).

right now boxo/verifcid has allowlist.IsAllowed which covers both.

does it make sense to add IsWriteAllowed and IsReadAllowed and switch to them in code so we allow reads of Sha1 but refuse writes? (keeping IsAllowed=IsWriteAllowed && IsReadAllowed for backward compatibility).

@guillaumemichel guillaumemichel marked this pull request as draft September 23, 2025 14:26
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

status/blocked Unable to be worked further until needs are met

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants