Refactor verification, integrity, parsing #404
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| assert.Error(tt, err) | ||
| assert.Contains(tt, err.Error(), "credential must have a proof") | ||
| assert.Contains(tt, err.Error(), "cred must have a proof") |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is this intentional?
| assert.Error(tt, err) | ||
| assert.Contains(tt, err.Error(), "credential must have a proof") | ||
| assert.Contains(tt, err.Error(), "cred must have a proof") |
| @@ -184,7 +182,7 @@ func TestVerifyJWTCredential(t *testing.T) { | |||
| jwtCred := getTestJWTCredential(tt, *signer) | |||
| _, err = VerifyJWTCredential(jwtCred, resolver) | |||
| assert.Error(tt, err) | |||
| assert.Contains(tt, err.Error(), "has no verification methods with kid: missing") | |||
| assert.Contains(tt, err.Error(), "has no validation methods with kid: missing") | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think this should stay as verification
credential/status/statuslist2021.go
Outdated
| @@ -250,7 +250,7 @@ func bitstringExpansion(compressedBitstring string) ([]string, error) { | |||
|
|
|||
| // ValidateCredentialInStatusList determines whether a credential is contained in a status list 2021 credential | |||
| // https://w3c-ccg.github.io/vc-status-list-2021/#validate-algorithm | |||
| // NOTE: this method does not perform credential signature/proof block verification | |||
| // NOTE: this method does not perform credential signature/proof block validation | |||
Comment on lines
+26
to
+29
| type Option struct { | ||
| ID OptionKey | ||
| Option any | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Using any is discouraged unless there is a very good reason to do so. Can this be updated to received typed params?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yes I have a separate ticket to refactor this #352
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why are we doing credential validation? I thought we should only be doing verification
There was a problem hiding this comment.
we'll need both - for checking status, schema, etc
| @@ -231,7 +231,7 @@ type JSONWebKeyVerifier struct { | |||
| jwx.Verifier | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| // Verify attempts to verify a `signature` against a given `message`, returning nil if the verification is successful | |||
| // Verify attempts to verify a `signature` against a given `message`, returning nil if the validation is successful | |||
| @@ -142,7 +142,7 @@ func (b BBSPlusSignatureSuite) Verify(v cryptosuite.Verifier, p cryptosuite.With | |||
| // make sure we set it back after we're done verifying | |||
| defer p.SetProof(proof) | |||
|
|
|||
| // remove the proof value in the proof before verification | |||
| // remove the proof value in the proof before validation | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should keep verification?
| @@ -153,7 +153,7 @@ func TestCredentialLDProof(t *testing.T) { | |||
| }, | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| // create a copy for value verification later | |||
| // create a copy for value validation later | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
seems like it shouldn't change
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #404 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 57.28% 56.86% -0.42%
==========================================
Files 67 67
Lines 7297 7304 +7
==========================================
- Hits 4180 4153 -27
- Misses 2380 2415 +35
+ Partials 737 736 -1
|
|
@andresuribe87 should have addressed all |
andresuribe87
approved these changes
Jun 1, 2023
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Small refactors / moving / renames before implementing generic data integrity verification