-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 165
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
Add API to export public key #87
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
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.
Looks reasonable to me. Thanks!
Will probably take me until the weekend to address these (will also wait for #86 to be settled) |
Pushed a new version, I hope I understood the direction you want to go into. A maybe nicer alternative could be provided if the |
I agree to license my contributions to each file under the terms given at the top of each file I changed.
Respectful ping, is there anything left unadressed here? Sorry, I am not well versed in how to resolve the requested changes correctly in github. I will gladly make any change still deemed necessary. Thanks! |
@shahn Are you still interested in this? If so, please reply to #87 (comment) so we can figure out a path forward. |
Yes, I am still very interested in this, just pretty overloaded with work Tasks atm and the question is a bit tricky. I hope to get to it soon. |
Note: I renamed the "master" branch to "main". Sorry for the inconvenience. This PR has had its base branch updated to "main" but you'll need to deal with the change in your local repo yourself. |
I wanted to pick this back up, but there's one catch with the idea of pre-parsing the SPKI. It would be a change of public API of |
This is a PR just to show what an API giving access to a certificate's public key could look like, as input for #85. It also depends on #86 getting merged for the test case, but I would be open to rebase this if #86 is unacceptable for any reason, of course.
Thanks!