Plume/Plume

分叉 24

Support blind key rotation #399

已合併

Plume_migration_agent 於 2019-01-05 21:30:29 +00:00 自 blind-key-rotation 合併了 3 個提交至 master

trinity-1686a 已留言

2018-12-30 11:30:10 +00:00

所有者

Fix #398

try to fetch user when receiving an invalid signature
regenerate new key-pair when sending Delete activity

Fix #398 - [x] try to fetch user when receiving an invalid signature - [x] regenerate new key-pair when sending `Delete` activity

codecov[bot] 已留言

2018-12-30 12:04:03 +00:00

(已從 github.com 遷移)

Codecov Report

Merging #399 into master will increase coverage by 0.21%.
The diff coverage is 0%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #399      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   27.87%   28.08%   +0.21%     
==========================================
  Files          63       63              
  Lines        7254     7405     +151     
==========================================
+ Hits         2022     2080      +58     
- Misses       5232     5325      +93

# [Codecov](https://codecov.io/gh/Plume-org/Plume/pull/399?src=pr&el=h1) Report > Merging [#399](https://codecov.io/gh/Plume-org/Plume/pull/399?src=pr&el=desc) into [master](https://codecov.io/gh/Plume-org/Plume/commit/3128e6a3b9963bda81f482e972eb853c0d564d35?src=pr&el=desc) will **increase** coverage by `0.21%`. > The diff coverage is `0%`. ```diff @@ Coverage Diff @@ ## master #399 +/- ## ========================================== + Coverage 27.87% 28.08% +0.21% ========================================== Files 63 63 Lines 7254 7405 +151 ========================================== + Hits 2022 2080 +58 - Misses 5232 5325 +93 ```

igalic (已從 github.com 遷移) 已審核 2018-12-30 14:28:28 +00:00

igalic (已從 github.com 遷移) 留下了回應

👀

src/routes/user.rs

igalic (已從 github.com 遷移) 已留言

2018-12-30 14:25:49 +00:00

should we be printing stuff here?

trinity-1686a 已審核 2018-12-30 14:38:00 +00:00

src/routes/user.rs

trinity-1686a 已留言

2018-12-30 14:38:00 +00:00

作者

所有者

I kept it because it was here before. If we had a proper logger this should get logged as this could be a an attack trial, but as it is, lost in stdout, I guess it's more of a debugging print?

igalic (已從 github.com 遷移) 已審核 2018-12-30 14:41:59 +00:00

src/routes/user.rs

igalic (已從 github.com 遷移) 已留言

2018-12-30 14:41:58 +00:00

i was wondering where our (debugging) log was

elegaanz (已從 github.com 遷移) 已審核 2019-01-04 19:20:03 +00:00

elegaanz (已從 github.com 遷移) 留下了回應

The code looks right, but I think I found a bug (maybe it's only me). To reproduce:

Create a@plume.one and b@plume.two
Make them follow each other
a@plume.one posts two articles, they are received on plume.two as they should
a@plume.one deletes one of these articles, and it is deleted on plume.two too
a@plume.one waits more than 10 minutes, and delete the second article
the Delete activity gets rejected by plume.two

Edit: also note that the next activities from a@plume.one are correctly received by plume.two

The code looks right, but I think I found a bug (maybe it's only me). To reproduce: - Create a@plume.one and b@plume.two - Make them follow each other - a@plume.one posts two articles, they are received on plume.two as they should - a@plume.one deletes one of these articles, and it is deleted on plume.two too - a@plume.one waits more than 10 minutes, and delete the second article - the `Delete` activity gets rejected by plume.two Edit: also note that the next activities from a@plume.one are correctly received by plume.two

elegaanz (已從 github.com 遷移) 核可了這些變更 2019-01-05 21:16:32 +00:00

elegaanz (已從 github.com 遷移) 留下了回應

It is working now. 👍 (but I don't understand what was wrong with the previous condition, and this one doesn't make sense for me)

It is working now. :+1: (but I don't understand what was wrong with the previous condition, and this one doesn't make sense for me)

trinity-1686a 已留言

2019-01-05 21:27:51 +00:00

作者

所有者

previously, the first if would match in case of invalid request, and the second would do exactly the same, match on invalid request. But the first block is the Ok(()) one, so on invalid request it would say "ok this is fine".
Now the condition for the second if is inverted, so when the request is valid it returns Ok(()), when the request is invalid it returns the signature error

previously, the first `if` would match in case of invalid request, and the second would do exactly the same, match on invalid request. But the first block is the Ok(()) one, so on _invalid_ request it would say "ok this is fine". Now the condition for the second `if` is inverted, so when the request is _valid_ it returns Ok(()), when the request is invalid it returns the signature error

👍 2

登入才能加入這對話。

沒有審核者

elegaanz

沒有里程碑

未選擇專案

沒有負責人

2 位參與者

通知

截止日期

截止日期無效或超出範圍，請使用「yyyy-mm-dd」的格式。

未設定截止日期。

先決條件

未設定先決條件。

參考: Plume/Plume#399

沒有提供敘述。

列
欄