5 ms·

It's not really an issue, it's just that the assumption that removing a commit from the history actually deletes it is not correct. That holds for both Git and

It's not really an issue, it's just that the assumption that removing a commit from the history actually deletes it is not correct. That holds for both Git and GitHub, and probably most other Git hosts. Also in general, don't assume that you can remove anything from the internet once it has been published.

IshKebab 3y ago
It is an issue. It means there's no way to actually delete commits from a GitHub repo. And it is a GitHub issue. If you were self-hosting you could just run `git prune` `git gc` or `git repack` or whatever the magic command is.
- biftek 3y ago
  If your remote is publicly accessible (GitHub or not) anyone could have cloned it while the sensitive data was there and no magic command will make that go away
  - vinay427 3y ago
    Right, but it’s not uncommon for a repo to be private with sensitive data that is identified and “removed” (using something like bfg or git-filter-branch) before being made public. Naturally, if it’s a key or something else revocable those extra precautions should be taken regardless of using these tools, but that isn’t an option for some types of data and this implies that users have no systematic recourse.
  - IshKebab 3y ago
    This is a classic binary security fallacy. It's like saying "there's no point having a lock on your front door because you occasionally leave it open and then anyone could walk in!". You know you are arguing that it should be impossible to delete things from a website right?