Re: Re: Speeding up Tree Verification
"Sid Spry" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.gentoo.portage.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Mon, Jun 29, 2020, at 9:34 PM, Zac Medico wrote: > On 6/29/20 7:15 PM, Sid Spry wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 29, 2020, at 9:13 PM, Sid Spry wrote: > >> Hello, > >> > >> I have some runnable pseudocode outlining a faster tree verification algorithm. > > > > Ah, right. It's worth noting that even faster than this algorithm is simply verifying > > a .tar.xz. Is that totally off the table? I realize it doesn't fit every usecase, but it > > seems to be faster in both sync and verification time. > > We've already got support for that with sync-type = webrsync. However, I > imagine sync-type = git is even better. All of the types are covered here: > > https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Portage_Security I'm being warned right now that webrsync-gpg is being deprecated; I've been using it. It is, amazingly, faster than a typical rsync and may be faster than a git pull though. The issue with git is there are some analyses that indicate you shouldn't rely on git for integrity, so you are back to verifying the tree on-disk, which is slower than verifying the .tar.xz. (To clarify: Even with signed commits the commit hashes could be attacked and this is considered somewhat feasible.)