Skip to content

Add NotAfter field to AssertionRequest#20

Merged
lukevalenta merged 1 commit intomainfrom
lvalenta/notafter
Feb 26, 2025
Merged

Add NotAfter field to AssertionRequest#20
lukevalenta merged 1 commit intomainfrom
lvalenta/notafter

Conversation

@lukevalenta
Copy link
Collaborator

  • Allow an initial notAfter flag to be specified when creating an assertion request. This can only serve to shorten the lifetime of the assertion, so may have limited value.
  • Add the minimum of (initial not_after, batch not_after, umbilical not_after) to a queued assertion. Later, this may be added to the abridged assertion and proof.

ca/ca.go Outdated
return err
}
// Clear the checksum as it will no longer be valid if NotAfter changes.
ar.Checksum = nil
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@lukevalenta lukevalenta Feb 26, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We could leave the notAfter field out of the checksum so we don't need to reset it, but if we're potentially going to add it to the Assertion later then it probably belongs. It's just a little weird for the checksums to be different before and after an assertion request is queued, but ah well.

We could also reintroduce the QueuedAssertion struct as

type QueuedAssertion struct {
  AssertionRequest AssertionRequest
  NotAfter time.Time
}

- Allow an initial notAfter flag to be specified when creating an
  assertion request. This can only serve to shorten the lifetime of the
  assertion, so may have limited value.
- Add the minimum of (initial not_after, batch not_after, umbilical
  not_after) to a queued assertion. Later, this may be added to the
  abridged assertion and proof.
@lukevalenta lukevalenta merged commit 7c2460e into main Feb 26, 2025
1 check passed
@lukevalenta lukevalenta deleted the lvalenta/notafter branch February 26, 2025 21:01
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants