Google Summer of Code: Encrypted branch/repository format status

[Martin Pool]

On 7/19/07, Robert Collins <robertc at robertcollins.net> wrote:

> > > The other question in my mind is whether this really needs to come in
> > > at the knit level.  Could you instead interpose an encrypting
> > > transport for access to some files?  I realize random access may be a
> > > bit hard to get just right, but that's probably no worse than for
> > > doing it in a knit... The transport interface is pretty stable.
>
> Doing it in a transport layer would essentially involve creating an
> encrypted VFS that works smoothly over FTP etc. I think thats a harder
> problem that working within our storage later. (It has to be safe
> against concurrent writers because its outside the locking logic).

I don't follow you.  It's quite reasonable to have a Transport that
doesn't support multiple concurrent writers to a file, or even that
refuses to layer on top of ftp.  This Transport could be created by
the Repository or even the Knit to do the encryption, and not be
generally accessible through get_transport.

-- 
Martin