[PATCH] Obfuscate Me Gently

[Brendan Cully]

Any further thoughts on this? I'm not actually sure how to properly
encode utf-8 as &#..; entities, and I do think this approach will
provide complete coverage for e-mail addresses, since they don't
contain 8-bit characters anyway.

On Wednesday, 07 June 2006 at 11:05, Brendan Cully wrote:
> (did you mean for this to go to me personally instead of the list?)
> 
> On Wednesday, 07 June 2006 at 09:53, Vadim Gelfer wrote:
> > On 6/5/06, Brendan Cully <brendan at kublai.com> wrote:
> > >on IRC Alexander Schremmer noted that UTF-8 characters in the Author
> > >field of hgweb's changelog get mangled. The attached patch softens
> > >obfuscate to only mangle characters < 128. Other alternatives might
> > >include:
> > 
> > this does not look right to me. correct thing would be to obfuscate
> > utf8 properly.
> 
> I suppose. But at the moment I don't think there's actually any hard
> requirement that the data be in UTF-8 (although it is assumed). So I'd
> rather not badly mangle the data if it happens to be 8859-1 or
> something. In practise, mangling only 7-bit characters is probably
> effective (especially since it automatically mangles the entirety of
> email addresses).
> 
> > >* splitting author into person and email, and only obfuscating the
> > >  email portion, which has to be 7-bit anyway IIRC.
> > 
> > there is no requirement from hg that email portion exist, so treating
> > it special is wrong.
> 
> I meant if it were there. It would fall back to no mangling if it
> weren't. But mangling 7-bit only should have an equivalent effect
> without making any assumptions about the author field.
> _______________________________________________
> Mercurial mailing list
> Mercurial at selenic.com
> http://selenic.com/mailman/listinfo/mercurial