Mixing
How to secure the git repo on a live server
Reading all the tutorials and articles on the internet. As a simple workflow, I have understood that we can create a bare repository on our live server and push updates to it from the local repo etc.
My question and concern is that since the live server will also be a Git repo and it would have the .git folder, Wouldn't that be a security problem? How to prevent access to it?
Update
Suppose my live folder on server is /www and I can access it from the browser http://myserver.com so I can also access http://myserver.com/.git/HEAD ??? How to prevent it?
git
asked Nov 24 '12 at 4:20
M. Ahmad ZafarM. Ahmad Zafar
3,44332241
add a comment |
Reading all the tutorials and articles on the internet. As a simple workflow, I have understood that we can create a bare repository on our live server and push updates to it from the local repo etc.
My question and concern is that since the live server will also be a Git repo and it would have the .git folder, Wouldn't that be a security problem? How to prevent access to it?
Update
Suppose my live folder on server is /www and I can access it from the browser http://myserver.com so I can also access http://myserver.com/.git/HEAD ??? How to prevent it?
git
asked Nov 24 '12 at 4:20
M. Ahmad ZafarM. Ahmad Zafar
3,44332241
add a comment |
Reading all the tutorials and articles on the internet. As a simple workflow, I have understood that we can create a bare repository on our live server and push updates to it from the local repo etc.
My question and concern is that since the live server will also be a Git repo and it would have the .git folder, Wouldn't that be a security problem? How to prevent access to it?
Update
Suppose my live folder on server is /www and I can access it from the browser http://myserver.com so I can also access http://myserver.com/.git/HEAD ??? How to prevent it?
git
asked Nov 24 '12 at 4:20
M. Ahmad ZafarM. Ahmad Zafar
3,44332241
Reading all the tutorials and articles on the internet. As a simple workflow, I have understood that we can create a bare repository on our live server and push updates to it from the local repo etc.
My question and concern is that since the live server will also be a Git repo and it would have the .git folder, Wouldn't that be a security problem? How to prevent access to it?
Update
Suppose my live folder on server is /www and I can access it from the browser http://myserver.com so I can also access http://myserver.com/.git/HEAD ??? How to prevent it?
git
git
asked Nov 24 '12 at 4:20
M. Ahmad ZafarM. Ahmad Zafar
3,44332241
asked Nov 24 '12 at 4:20
M. Ahmad ZafarM. Ahmad Zafar
3,44332241
edited Nov 24 '12 at 4:43
M. Ahmad Zafar
asked Nov 24 '12 at 4:20
M. Ahmad ZafarM. Ahmad Zafar
3,44332241
asked Nov 24 '12 at 4:20
M. Ahmad ZafarM. Ahmad Zafar
3,44332241
asked Nov 24 '12 at 4:20
M. Ahmad ZafarM. Ahmad Zafar
3,44332241
3,44332241
add a comment |
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
You may want to consider separating the repository and the working tree.
For example, somewhere outside of the folder served by your Web server, run git init --bare. Then replace the config file in this directory with the following (where /path/to/web/root is the path where the files should be placed).
[core]
repositoryformatversion = 0
filemode = true
bare = false
worktree = /path/to/web/root
[receive]
denycurrentbranch = ignore
Finally add hooks/post-receive with the following contents and mark it executable
#!/bin/sh
git checkout -f
Now whenever you push to the repository, the files will be checked out into the correct location and you never have to worry about the repository accidentally being served up.
answered Nov 24 '12 at 5:36
Michael MiorMichael Mior
21.6k66292
If I understood it correctly, its a normal repo but instead of have a.gitfolder inside a the web directory, the.gitis placed in another directory lets say namedgit_config??
– M. Ahmad Zafar
Nov 24 '12 at 5:40
Exactly. And you would place thegit_configdirectory somewhere outside of the directory served by your web server. Then there's no risk of this being exposed.
– Michael Mior
Nov 24 '12 at 18:58
I realized I used the phrase "no risk of this being exposed." Of course it's still possible that someone compromises your web server through other means and accesses the repository data. But this does at least prevent your web server from actively serving it.
– Michael Mior
Nov 15 '16 at 15:49
add a comment |
Git does not care about security of accessing to your .git folders - it is your responsibility and OS enforcing access to them.
Basically, if you can ssh into your server and access .git folder - you can do whatever you want, and so does git.
There is very convenitent way to handle users, passwords, ssh key management, etc. is to install Gerrit. Gerrit is Git server implemented in Java, but it also happens to be great code review engine. Code review part is very useful, however you do not have to use it if you don't want to. You can move to use code review later, but provided git server, web ui and user/keys management, UI to control access permissions to different git repos are very nice.
answered Nov 24 '12 at 4:28
mvpmvp
72.3k887123
Suppose my live folder on server is/wwwand I can access it from the browserhttp://myserver.comso I can also accesshttp://myserver.com/.git/HEAD??? How to prevent it?
– M. Ahmad Zafar
Nov 24 '12 at 4:43
You could change apache .htaccess to containRewriteEngine On,RewriteRule ^(.*/)?.git+ - [F,L]- this will forbid serving git internals over the web. See more here serverfault.com/questions/128069/…
– mvp
Nov 24 '12 at 4:47
add a comment |
Love the accepted answer, great example of the use of git hooks.
How I went around this problem (I also posted a question long time ago whether the website should be a repository) is, after thinking about it, I decided to create git releases, zip-em-up, and decompress into a "live" folder.
With the use of helper scripts, and git aliases, of course.
I have a couple of scripts, such as rgitpropup (which merges branches from the ground up to master, and pushes to origin)
and rgitrelease, which creates a GPG signed release, uses a dir prefix as an argument, and zips it up.
I've aliased the propup script (when aliasing scripts, you prefix them with "!", btw.)
I guess with hooks you could also manage the installation/decompression into the "live" directory...
EDIT: archive is a git command, and it has built-in support for compressing to archive formats. Usually it is used in combination with the tag command, which has bult-in support for pgp/gpg signing (gpg is how digitally sign in git in general, not to be confused with sign-off)
answered Nov 21 '18 at 14:29
Agnes K. CathexAgnes K. Cathex
279
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
StackExchange.snippets.init();
});
});
}, "code-snippets");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f13538226%2fhow-to-secure-the-git-repo-on-a-live-server%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
You may want to consider separating the repository and the working tree.
For example, somewhere outside of the folder served by your Web server, run git init --bare. Then replace the config file in this directory with the following (where /path/to/web/root is the path where the files should be placed).
[core]
repositoryformatversion = 0
filemode = true
bare = false
worktree = /path/to/web/root
[receive]
denycurrentbranch = ignore
Finally add hooks/post-receive with the following contents and mark it executable
#!/bin/sh
git checkout -f
Now whenever you push to the repository, the files will be checked out into the correct location and you never have to worry about the repository accidentally being served up.
answered Nov 24 '12 at 5:36
Michael MiorMichael Mior
21.6k66292
If I understood it correctly, its a normal repo but instead of have a.gitfolder inside a the web directory, the.gitis placed in another directory lets say namedgit_config??
– M. Ahmad Zafar
Nov 24 '12 at 5:40
Exactly. And you would place thegit_configdirectory somewhere outside of the directory served by your web server. Then there's no risk of this being exposed.
– Michael Mior
Nov 24 '12 at 18:58
I realized I used the phrase "no risk of this being exposed." Of course it's still possible that someone compromises your web server through other means and accesses the repository data. But this does at least prevent your web server from actively serving it.
– Michael Mior
Nov 15 '16 at 15:49
add a comment |
You may want to consider separating the repository and the working tree.
For example, somewhere outside of the folder served by your Web server, run git init --bare. Then replace the config file in this directory with the following (where /path/to/web/root is the path where the files should be placed).
[core]
repositoryformatversion = 0
filemode = true
bare = false
worktree = /path/to/web/root
[receive]
denycurrentbranch = ignore
Finally add hooks/post-receive with the following contents and mark it executable
#!/bin/sh
git checkout -f
Now whenever you push to the repository, the files will be checked out into the correct location and you never have to worry about the repository accidentally being served up.
answered Nov 24 '12 at 5:36
Michael MiorMichael Mior
21.6k66292
If I understood it correctly, its a normal repo but instead of have a.gitfolder inside a the web directory, the.gitis placed in another directory lets say namedgit_config??
– M. Ahmad Zafar
Nov 24 '12 at 5:40
Exactly. And you would place thegit_configdirectory somewhere outside of the directory served by your web server. Then there's no risk of this being exposed.
– Michael Mior
Nov 24 '12 at 18:58
I realized I used the phrase "no risk of this being exposed." Of course it's still possible that someone compromises your web server through other means and accesses the repository data. But this does at least prevent your web server from actively serving it.
– Michael Mior
Nov 15 '16 at 15:49
add a comment |
You may want to consider separating the repository and the working tree.
For example, somewhere outside of the folder served by your Web server, run git init --bare. Then replace the config file in this directory with the following (where /path/to/web/root is the path where the files should be placed).
[core]
repositoryformatversion = 0
filemode = true
bare = false
worktree = /path/to/web/root
[receive]
denycurrentbranch = ignore
Finally add hooks/post-receive with the following contents and mark it executable
#!/bin/sh
git checkout -f
Now whenever you push to the repository, the files will be checked out into the correct location and you never have to worry about the repository accidentally being served up.
answered Nov 24 '12 at 5:36
Michael MiorMichael Mior
21.6k66292
You may want to consider separating the repository and the working tree.
For example, somewhere outside of the folder served by your Web server, run git init --bare. Then replace the config file in this directory with the following (where /path/to/web/root is the path where the files should be placed).
[core]
repositoryformatversion = 0
filemode = true
bare = false
worktree = /path/to/web/root
[receive]
denycurrentbranch = ignore
Finally add hooks/post-receive with the following contents and mark it executable
#!/bin/sh
git checkout -f
Now whenever you push to the repository, the files will be checked out into the correct location and you never have to worry about the repository accidentally being served up.
answered Nov 24 '12 at 5:36
Michael MiorMichael Mior
21.6k66292
answered Nov 24 '12 at 5:36
Michael MiorMichael Mior
21.6k66292
answered Nov 24 '12 at 5:36
Michael MiorMichael Mior
21.6k66292
answered Nov 24 '12 at 5:36
Michael MiorMichael Mior
21.6k66292
21.6k66292
If I understood it correctly, its a normal repo but instead of have a.gitfolder inside a the web directory, the.gitis placed in another directory lets say namedgit_config??
– M. Ahmad Zafar
Nov 24 '12 at 5:40
Exactly. And you would place thegit_configdirectory somewhere outside of the directory served by your web server. Then there's no risk of this being exposed.
– Michael Mior
Nov 24 '12 at 18:58
I realized I used the phrase "no risk of this being exposed." Of course it's still possible that someone compromises your web server through other means and accesses the repository data. But this does at least prevent your web server from actively serving it.
– Michael Mior
Nov 15 '16 at 15:49
add a comment |
If I understood it correctly, its a normal repo but instead of have a.gitfolder inside a the web directory, the.gitis placed in another directory lets say namedgit_config??
– M. Ahmad Zafar
Nov 24 '12 at 5:40
Exactly. And you would place thegit_configdirectory somewhere outside of the directory served by your web server. Then there's no risk of this being exposed.
– Michael Mior
Nov 24 '12 at 18:58
I realized I used the phrase "no risk of this being exposed." Of course it's still possible that someone compromises your web server through other means and accesses the repository data. But this does at least prevent your web server from actively serving it.
– Michael Mior
Nov 15 '16 at 15:49
If I understood it correctly, its a normal repo but instead of have a
.git folder inside a the web directory, the .git is placed in another directory lets say named git_config ??– M. Ahmad Zafar
Nov 24 '12 at 5:40
If I understood it correctly, its a normal repo but instead of have a
.git folder inside a the web directory, the .git is placed in another directory lets say named git_config ??– M. Ahmad Zafar
Nov 24 '12 at 5:40
Exactly. And you would place the
git_config directory somewhere outside of the directory served by your web server. Then there's no risk of this being exposed.– Michael Mior
Nov 24 '12 at 18:58
Exactly. And you would place the
git_config directory somewhere outside of the directory served by your web server. Then there's no risk of this being exposed.– Michael Mior
Nov 24 '12 at 18:58
I realized I used the phrase "no risk of this being exposed." Of course it's still possible that someone compromises your web server through other means and accesses the repository data. But this does at least prevent your web server from actively serving it.
– Michael Mior
Nov 15 '16 at 15:49
I realized I used the phrase "no risk of this being exposed." Of course it's still possible that someone compromises your web server through other means and accesses the repository data. But this does at least prevent your web server from actively serving it.
– Michael Mior
Nov 15 '16 at 15:49
add a comment |
Git does not care about security of accessing to your .git folders - it is your responsibility and OS enforcing access to them.
Basically, if you can ssh into your server and access .git folder - you can do whatever you want, and so does git.
There is very convenitent way to handle users, passwords, ssh key management, etc. is to install Gerrit. Gerrit is Git server implemented in Java, but it also happens to be great code review engine. Code review part is very useful, however you do not have to use it if you don't want to. You can move to use code review later, but provided git server, web ui and user/keys management, UI to control access permissions to different git repos are very nice.
answered Nov 24 '12 at 4:28
mvpmvp
72.3k887123
Suppose my live folder on server is/wwwand I can access it from the browserhttp://myserver.comso I can also accesshttp://myserver.com/.git/HEAD??? How to prevent it?
– M. Ahmad Zafar
Nov 24 '12 at 4:43
You could change apache .htaccess to containRewriteEngine On,RewriteRule ^(.*/)?.git+ - [F,L]- this will forbid serving git internals over the web. See more here serverfault.com/questions/128069/…
– mvp
Nov 24 '12 at 4:47
add a comment |
Git does not care about security of accessing to your .git folders - it is your responsibility and OS enforcing access to them.
Basically, if you can ssh into your server and access .git folder - you can do whatever you want, and so does git.
There is very convenitent way to handle users, passwords, ssh key management, etc. is to install Gerrit. Gerrit is Git server implemented in Java, but it also happens to be great code review engine. Code review part is very useful, however you do not have to use it if you don't want to. You can move to use code review later, but provided git server, web ui and user/keys management, UI to control access permissions to different git repos are very nice.
answered Nov 24 '12 at 4:28
mvpmvp
72.3k887123
Suppose my live folder on server is/wwwand I can access it from the browserhttp://myserver.comso I can also accesshttp://myserver.com/.git/HEAD??? How to prevent it?
– M. Ahmad Zafar
Nov 24 '12 at 4:43
You could change apache .htaccess to containRewriteEngine On,RewriteRule ^(.*/)?.git+ - [F,L]- this will forbid serving git internals over the web. See more here serverfault.com/questions/128069/…
– mvp
Nov 24 '12 at 4:47
add a comment |
Git does not care about security of accessing to your .git folders - it is your responsibility and OS enforcing access to them.
Basically, if you can ssh into your server and access .git folder - you can do whatever you want, and so does git.
There is very convenitent way to handle users, passwords, ssh key management, etc. is to install Gerrit. Gerrit is Git server implemented in Java, but it also happens to be great code review engine. Code review part is very useful, however you do not have to use it if you don't want to. You can move to use code review later, but provided git server, web ui and user/keys management, UI to control access permissions to different git repos are very nice.
answered Nov 24 '12 at 4:28
mvpmvp
72.3k887123
Git does not care about security of accessing to your .git folders - it is your responsibility and OS enforcing access to them.
Basically, if you can ssh into your server and access .git folder - you can do whatever you want, and so does git.
There is very convenitent way to handle users, passwords, ssh key management, etc. is to install Gerrit. Gerrit is Git server implemented in Java, but it also happens to be great code review engine. Code review part is very useful, however you do not have to use it if you don't want to. You can move to use code review later, but provided git server, web ui and user/keys management, UI to control access permissions to different git repos are very nice.
answered Nov 24 '12 at 4:28
mvpmvp
72.3k887123
answered Nov 24 '12 at 4:28
mvpmvp
72.3k887123
answered Nov 24 '12 at 4:28
mvpmvp
72.3k887123
answered Nov 24 '12 at 4:28
mvpmvp
72.3k887123
72.3k887123
Suppose my live folder on server is/wwwand I can access it from the browserhttp://myserver.comso I can also accesshttp://myserver.com/.git/HEAD??? How to prevent it?
– M. Ahmad Zafar
Nov 24 '12 at 4:43
You could change apache .htaccess to containRewriteEngine On,RewriteRule ^(.*/)?.git+ - [F,L]- this will forbid serving git internals over the web. See more here serverfault.com/questions/128069/…
– mvp
Nov 24 '12 at 4:47
add a comment |
Suppose my live folder on server is/wwwand I can access it from the browserhttp://myserver.comso I can also accesshttp://myserver.com/.git/HEAD??? How to prevent it?
– M. Ahmad Zafar
Nov 24 '12 at 4:43
You could change apache .htaccess to containRewriteEngine On,RewriteRule ^(.*/)?.git+ - [F,L]- this will forbid serving git internals over the web. See more here serverfault.com/questions/128069/…
– mvp
Nov 24 '12 at 4:47
Suppose my live folder on server is
/www and I can access it from the browser http://myserver.com so I can also access http://myserver.com/.git/HEAD ??? How to prevent it?– M. Ahmad Zafar
Nov 24 '12 at 4:43
Suppose my live folder on server is
/www and I can access it from the browser http://myserver.com so I can also access http://myserver.com/.git/HEAD ??? How to prevent it?– M. Ahmad Zafar
Nov 24 '12 at 4:43
You could change apache .htaccess to contain
RewriteEngine On, RewriteRule ^(.*/)?.git+ - [F,L] - this will forbid serving git internals over the web. See more here serverfault.com/questions/128069/…– mvp
Nov 24 '12 at 4:47
You could change apache .htaccess to contain
RewriteEngine On, RewriteRule ^(.*/)?.git+ - [F,L] - this will forbid serving git internals over the web. See more here serverfault.com/questions/128069/…– mvp
Nov 24 '12 at 4:47
add a comment |
Love the accepted answer, great example of the use of git hooks.
How I went around this problem (I also posted a question long time ago whether the website should be a repository) is, after thinking about it, I decided to create git releases, zip-em-up, and decompress into a "live" folder.
With the use of helper scripts, and git aliases, of course.
I have a couple of scripts, such as rgitpropup (which merges branches from the ground up to master, and pushes to origin)
and rgitrelease, which creates a GPG signed release, uses a dir prefix as an argument, and zips it up.
I've aliased the propup script (when aliasing scripts, you prefix them with "!", btw.)
I guess with hooks you could also manage the installation/decompression into the "live" directory...
EDIT: archive is a git command, and it has built-in support for compressing to archive formats. Usually it is used in combination with the tag command, which has bult-in support for pgp/gpg signing (gpg is how digitally sign in git in general, not to be confused with sign-off)
answered Nov 21 '18 at 14:29
Agnes K. CathexAgnes K. Cathex
279
add a comment |
Love the accepted answer, great example of the use of git hooks.
How I went around this problem (I also posted a question long time ago whether the website should be a repository) is, after thinking about it, I decided to create git releases, zip-em-up, and decompress into a "live" folder.
With the use of helper scripts, and git aliases, of course.
I have a couple of scripts, such as rgitpropup (which merges branches from the ground up to master, and pushes to origin)
and rgitrelease, which creates a GPG signed release, uses a dir prefix as an argument, and zips it up.
I've aliased the propup script (when aliasing scripts, you prefix them with "!", btw.)
I guess with hooks you could also manage the installation/decompression into the "live" directory...
EDIT: archive is a git command, and it has built-in support for compressing to archive formats. Usually it is used in combination with the tag command, which has bult-in support for pgp/gpg signing (gpg is how digitally sign in git in general, not to be confused with sign-off)
answered Nov 21 '18 at 14:29
Agnes K. CathexAgnes K. Cathex
279
add a comment |
Love the accepted answer, great example of the use of git hooks.
How I went around this problem (I also posted a question long time ago whether the website should be a repository) is, after thinking about it, I decided to create git releases, zip-em-up, and decompress into a "live" folder.
With the use of helper scripts, and git aliases, of course.
I have a couple of scripts, such as rgitpropup (which merges branches from the ground up to master, and pushes to origin)
and rgitrelease, which creates a GPG signed release, uses a dir prefix as an argument, and zips it up.
I've aliased the propup script (when aliasing scripts, you prefix them with "!", btw.)
I guess with hooks you could also manage the installation/decompression into the "live" directory...
EDIT: archive is a git command, and it has built-in support for compressing to archive formats. Usually it is used in combination with the tag command, which has bult-in support for pgp/gpg signing (gpg is how digitally sign in git in general, not to be confused with sign-off)
answered Nov 21 '18 at 14:29
Agnes K. CathexAgnes K. Cathex
279
Love the accepted answer, great example of the use of git hooks.
How I went around this problem (I also posted a question long time ago whether the website should be a repository) is, after thinking about it, I decided to create git releases, zip-em-up, and decompress into a "live" folder.
With the use of helper scripts, and git aliases, of course.
I have a couple of scripts, such as rgitpropup (which merges branches from the ground up to master, and pushes to origin)
and rgitrelease, which creates a GPG signed release, uses a dir prefix as an argument, and zips it up.
I've aliased the propup script (when aliasing scripts, you prefix them with "!", btw.)
I guess with hooks you could also manage the installation/decompression into the "live" directory...
EDIT: archive is a git command, and it has built-in support for compressing to archive formats. Usually it is used in combination with the tag command, which has bult-in support for pgp/gpg signing (gpg is how digitally sign in git in general, not to be confused with sign-off)
answered Nov 21 '18 at 14:29
Agnes K. CathexAgnes K. Cathex
279
edited Nov 21 '18 at 14:43
answered Nov 21 '18 at 14:29
Agnes K. CathexAgnes K. Cathex
279
answered Nov 21 '18 at 14:29
Agnes K. CathexAgnes K. Cathex
279
answered Nov 21 '18 at 14:29
Agnes K. CathexAgnes K. Cathex
279
279
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f13538226%2fhow-to-secure-the-git-repo-on-a-live-server%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
