fix: always encode keys according to RFCs #733
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
Signed-off-by: Timo Glastra <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Timo Glastra <[email protected]>
9 tasks
jakubkoci
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 12, 2022
Signed-off-by: Timo Glastra <[email protected]>
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Keys were not encoded in services according to the RFCs. This is quite complex TBH as there's three different service types with three different encodings....
The biggest problem was the encoding of the
did-communciationused in did documents, those should use did references local to the did, not did:key dids and not raw public keys.This PR updates a lot of places to pass around keys so we have a consistent format to pass around keys in the framework, which made it a lot easier to work with the different formats (we never know which of the three encodings recipientKey of type string means).
A lot more changes than I initially anticipated, but this is an important fix to adhere to the RFCs.
Dependant on #717. We can merge that PR first or merge this PR into #717