Author: Peter Todd 2013-12-19 17:44:06
Published on: 2013-12-19T17:44:06+00:00
In an email thread, Amir Taaki and others debated the merits of signing each commit. While Linus Torvalds advises against it, arguing that it is unnecessary and potentially weakens signatures, Taaki argues that per-commit signatures are necessary for Bitcoin development because code is often passed around on third-party platforms like GitHub. In the Linux model, code is submitted to mailing lists and reviewed by trusted maintainers, with signed tags created at various stages and culminating in a signed release tag. However, since Bitcoin development often occurs on GitHub, per-commit signatures provide a strong guarantee of who made the commit, which is more important than providing complete assurance about the contents of the code. Another topic discussed was identity systems for messaging layers, with Taaki recommending the use of off-the-shelf systems like OpenPGP and SSL certificate authorities rather than introducing new identity systems that could be vulnerable to MITM attacks.
Updated on: 2023-06-07T22:37:57.343263+00:00