-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 16
Updates to key accessors and fix proof algorithm type #124
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Updates to key accessors and fix proof algorithm type #124
Conversation
This simplifies the code and doesn't do unnecessary recomputation of the revoked ids collection every time a new block is added. Likely, a relying party would only access the collection of revoked ids once to check revocation anyway. This is in line with the rust implemention that also assembles the collection of revoked identifiers on the fly.
These methods are akin to those of the rust implementation.
|
Why removing revocationsIds from unverified? |
This simplifies the code and doesn't do unnecessary recomputation of the revoked ids collection |
|
|
||
| public Option<PublicKey> blockExternalKey(int index) { | ||
| if (index == 0) { | ||
| return authority.getExternalKey(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
note: this will always turn None, there is no external signature on the authority block
| ? new Proof.FinalSignature(data.getProof().getFinalSignature().toByteArray()) | ||
| : new Proof.NextSecret( | ||
| KeyPair.generate( | ||
| authority.getKey().getAlgorithm(), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
nice catch, thanks
|
extracting the revocation ids on the fly is fine, yes. @preuss-adam could you fill the Eclipse Contributor agreement please? (this is not a CLA, it is just there to guarantee that you are authorized to make this contribution) |
@Geal Apologies for the delay. I've signed the agreement now. |
I was expecting a change as a return None for the comment of @Geal but I think it is okay and it makes sense keeping like this for understanding. |
Gotcha. I could change it if you like. I left it like this because the rust version behaves the same way. |
Changes are best reviewed commit-by-commit.
UnverifiedBiscuit.UnverifiedBiscuitwith external key accessors.