a git history is easily fabricated. you can freely edit it, remove entries or write into it whatever you want, including impersonating other users and fabricating datetime
While true, a git history is also easily protected against fabrication. Require cryptographically signed commits and prevent contributors from force-pushing to the public repo and you should be good.
I mean, if you try to “scam” the gov, you can clone some codeberg repo to github, rename it, rewrite history to make the commits look like you did everything and then tell the gov “look at how much work I volunteered”. At least in germany, there are currently not enough public workers so many little things go unchecked.
Ah I see, yeah I guess something like that would be possible. On the other hand it would be trivial to prove this happened even in the future as long as the government keeps a unedited copy of this repo.
a git history is easily fabricated. you can freely edit it, remove entries or write into it whatever you want, including impersonating other users and fabricating datetime
https://github.com/Amog-OS/AmogOS/commit/4f503a0
While true, a git history is also easily protected against fabrication. Require cryptographically signed commits and prevent contributors from force-pushing to the public repo and you should be good.
I mean, if you try to “scam” the gov, you can clone some codeberg repo to github, rename it, rewrite history to make the commits look like you did everything and then tell the gov “look at how much work I volunteered”. At least in germany, there are currently not enough public workers so many little things go unchecked.
Ah I see, yeah I guess something like that would be possible. On the other hand it would be trivial to prove this happened even in the future as long as the government keeps a unedited copy of this repo.