feat(dpp): added identity public key private key validation methods #2235
Conversation
WalkthroughThis pull request introduces a new method Changes
Possibly related PRs
Suggested reviewers
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 4
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (2)
packages/rs-dpp/src/identity/identity_public_key/methods/hash/v0/mod.rs (1)
8-13: LGTM: New method signature added correctly. Consider adding documentation.The
validate_private_key_bytesmethod signature is well-defined and aligns with the PR objectives. It takes appropriate parameters and returns a suitable type for validation results and error handling.Consider adding documentation comments to describe the method's purpose, parameters, return value, and possible error cases. This will help users of the trait understand how to use the method correctly. For example:
/// Verifies that the given private key bytes match this identity public key. /// /// # Arguments /// /// * `private_key_bytes` - A slice of bytes representing the private key to validate. /// * `network` - The network context for the validation. /// /// # Returns /// /// * `Ok(true)` if the private key is valid and matches the public key. /// * `Ok(false)` if the private key is valid but does not match the public key. /// * `Err(ProtocolError)` if there's an error during validation or if the operation is not supported for the key type. fn validate_private_key_bytes( &self, private_key_bytes: &[u8], network: Network, ) -> Result<bool, ProtocolError>;packages/rs-dpp/src/identity/identity_public_key/methods/hash/mod.rs (1)
15-23: LGTM: New method implemented correctly with a suggestion for future-proofing.The
validate_private_key_bytesmethod is correctly implemented and aligns with the PR objectives. It properly delegates to theV0variant and handles potential errors.Consider future-proofing the implementation by adding a default case in the match statement:
fn validate_private_key_bytes( &self, private_key_bytes: &[u8], network: Network, ) -> Result<bool, ProtocolError> { match self { IdentityPublicKey::V0(v0) => v0.validate_private_key_bytes(private_key_bytes, network), + _ => Err(ProtocolError::UnknownVersionError { + method: "validate_private_key_bytes".to_string(), + version: self.version(), + }), } }This change would make the code more robust to future additions of new variants to the
IdentityPublicKeyenum.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (5)
- packages/rs-dpp/src/identity/identity_public_key/methods/hash/mod.rs (2 hunks)
- packages/rs-dpp/src/identity/identity_public_key/methods/hash/v0/mod.rs (1 hunks)
- packages/rs-dpp/src/identity/identity_public_key/v0/methods/mod.rs (2 hunks)
- packages/rs-platform-value/src/types/identifier.rs (0 hunks)
- packages/rs-sdk/src/platform/types/evonode.rs (1 hunks)
💤 Files with no reviewable changes (1)
- packages/rs-platform-value/src/types/identifier.rs
🧰 Additional context used
🔇 Additional comments (7)
packages/rs-dpp/src/identity/identity_public_key/methods/hash/v0/mod.rs (1)
2-2: LGTM: New import added correctly.The
Networktype from thedashcorecrate is imported, which is necessary for the newvalidate_private_key_bytesmethod. The import is placed appropriately after the existing import.packages/rs-dpp/src/identity/identity_public_key/methods/hash/mod.rs (2)
5-5: LGTM: New import added correctly.The
Networkimport from thedashcorecrate is correctly added and necessary for the newvalidate_private_key_bytesmethod.
Line range hint
1-23: Overall assessment: Changes look good with a minor suggestion for improvement.The new
validate_private_key_bytesmethod and its implementation align well with the PR objectives. The code is consistent with existing patterns and handles errors appropriately. Consider the suggested future-proofing improvement to make the code more robust to potential future changes.packages/rs-sdk/src/platform/types/evonode.rs (3)
Line range hint
1-116: Overall: Minor cleanup change looks goodThe removal of the unused
DapiClientErrorimport is a positive change that helps maintain code cleanliness. The rest of the file remains unchanged, preserving the existing functionality of theEvoNodestruct and its implementations. This change aligns with the PR objectives and doesn't introduce any breaking changes or new functionality to this particular file.
Line range hint
67-116: Verify error handling in execute_transport methodThe removal of
DapiClientErrorimport doesn't seem to affect the error handling in theexecute_transportmethod. The method still uses the generic error type from theTransportClienttrait. However, it's worth double-checking that all potential error cases are still properly handled.Let's verify the error handling:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check error handling in execute_transport method # Test: Extract the execute_transport method and look for error handling. Expect: Proper error handling without DapiClientError. ast-grep --lang rust --pattern $'fn execute_transport<\'c>( $$$ ) -> BoxFuture<\'c, Result<Self::Response, <Self::Client as TransportClient>::Error>> { $$$ }' packages/rs-sdk/src/platform/types/evonode.rs
13-13: LGTM: Import cleanup looks good.The removal of the unused
DapiClientErrorimport helps to keep the code clean and reduces unnecessary dependencies. This change aligns with good coding practices.Let's verify that
DapiClientErroris indeed not used anywhere in this file:✅ Verification successful
Import removal verified and approved.
The
DapiClientErrorimport has been successfully removed and is no longer used in theevonode.rsfile. This cleanup enhances code readability and reduces unnecessary dependencies.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify that DapiClientError is not used in the file # Test: Search for DapiClientError in the file. Expect: No occurrences. rg --type rust 'DapiClientError' packages/rs-sdk/src/platform/types/evonode.rsLength of output: 4103
packages/rs-dpp/src/identity/identity_public_key/v0/methods/mod.rs (1)
57-66: Ensure public key encoding matches during comparison.Verify that the public key bytes generated by
private_key.public_key(&secp).to_bytes()are in the same encoding format (compressed or uncompressed) asself.data. Mismatched encoding formats could lead to false negatives during validation.Consider specifying the encoding explicitly when generating the public key bytes.
-Ok(private_key.public_key(&secp).to_bytes() == self.data.as_slice()) +Ok(private_key.public_key(&secp).serialize().as_ref() == self.data.as_slice())
packages/rs-dpp/src/identity/identity_public_key/v0/methods/mod.rs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (4)
packages/rs-dpp/src/identity/identity_public_key/v0/methods/mod.rs (4)
51-125: LGTM! Consider improving error handling for unsupported key types.The implementation of
validate_private_key_byteslooks correct and covers all the necessary key types. It properly handles different scenarios and uses conditional compilation for feature-dependent code.Consider returning a more specific error type for unsupported key types instead of using
ProtocolError::NotSupported. This would allow for more granular error handling by the caller. For example:pub enum KeyValidationError { UnsupportedKeyType(KeyType), MissingFeature(&'static str), // ... other error variants } // Then in the method: KeyType::BIP13_SCRIPT_HASH => { Err(KeyValidationError::UnsupportedKeyType(KeyType::BIP13_SCRIPT_HASH).into()) }
137-176: LGTM! Consider adding edge cases to the test.The test for ECDSA_SECP256K1 keys covers the basic functionality of
validate_private_key_bytes. It includes both positive and negative test cases, which is good.Consider adding more edge cases to strengthen the test suite:
- Test with a private key of incorrect length.
- Test with a valid private key but for a different public key.
- Test with different networks (Mainnet, Testnet, Regtest) to ensure network parameter handling is correct.
Example:
// Test with incorrect length let short_private_key = vec![0u8; 31]; // One byte short assert!(identity_public_key.validate_private_key_bytes(&short_private_key, Network::Testnet).is_err()); // Test with different network assert_eq!( identity_public_key.validate_private_key_bytes(&private_key_data, Network::Mainnet).unwrap(), true );
178-217: LGTM! Consider adding a test for the feature-disabled case.The test for BLS12_381 keys is well-structured and covers both positive and negative cases. It's good that it's conditionally compiled with the "bls-signatures" feature.
Consider adding a test for the case when the "bls-signatures" feature is disabled. This can be done using
#[cfg(not(feature = "bls-signatures"))]. For example:#[cfg(not(feature = "bls-signatures"))] #[test] fn test_validate_private_key_bytes_bls12_381_feature_disabled() { let identity_public_key = IdentityPublicKeyV0 { // ... initialize with BLS12_381 key type }; let result = identity_public_key.validate_private_key_bytes(&[0u8; 32], Network::Testnet); assert!(matches!(result, Err(ProtocolError::NotSupported(_)))); }This ensures that the error handling for the feature-disabled case is also tested.
219-258: LGTM! Consider additional test cases and error handling.The test for EDDSA_25519_HASH160 keys is well-structured and covers both positive and negative cases. It's good that it's conditionally compiled with the "ed25519-dalek" feature.
Consider the following improvements:
- Add a test for the feature-disabled case, similar to the suggestion for BLS12_381.
- Test with private keys of incorrect length, as EdDSA keys have a specific length requirement.
- Add error handling for the
try_into()operation in thevalidate_private_key_bytesmethod, as it might panic if the private key length is incorrect.Example for point 3:
#[cfg(feature = "ed25519-dalek")] { - let secret_key = match private_key_bytes.try_into() { - Ok(secret_key) => secret_key, - Err(_) => return Ok(false), + let secret_key: [u8; 32] = match private_key_bytes.try_into() { + Ok(secret_key) => secret_key, + Err(_) => return Err(ProtocolError::InvalidPrivateKeyLength), }; let key_pair = ed25519_dalek::SigningKey::from_bytes(&secret_key); // ... rest of the implementation }This change ensures that the method returns an error instead of a boolean false when the private key length is incorrect, which is more informative for the caller.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
- packages/rs-dpp/src/identity/identity_public_key/key_type.rs (1 hunks)
- packages/rs-dpp/src/identity/identity_public_key/v0/methods/mod.rs (2 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🔇 Additional comments (3)
packages/rs-dpp/src/identity/identity_public_key/v0/methods/mod.rs (2)
Line range hint
1-258: Overall, the implementation looks good with room for minor improvements.The new
validate_private_key_bytesmethod and its associated tests are well-implemented and cover the main functionality for different key types. The use of conditional compilation for feature-dependent code is appropriate.To further improve the code:
- Correct the import path for
Secp256k1.- Consider introducing more specific error types for better error handling.
- Enhance the test suite with more edge cases and feature-disabled scenarios.
- Improve error handling in the EdDSA implementation to avoid potential panics.
These changes will make the code more robust and easier to maintain in the long run.
8-9:⚠️ Potential issueCorrect the import path for
Secp256k1.The import statement for
Secp256k1is still incorrect. It should be imported fromdashcore::secp256k1, notdashcore::key.Apply the following diff to correct the import:
-use dashcore::key::Secp256k1; +use dashcore::secp256k1::Secp256k1;packages/rs-dpp/src/identity/identity_public_key/key_type.rs (1)
308-310: LGTM! Consistent hashing for EDDSA_25519_HASH160 public key.The change correctly applies the
ripemd160_sha256hash to the EDDSA_25519_HASH160 public key before returning it. This modification:
- Aligns the behavior with other hash-based key types (e.g., ECDSA_HASH160).
- Ensures consistency in public key representation for hash-based key types.
- Matches the expectations set by the key type name (HASH160).
The private key handling remains unchanged, maintaining the existing behavior.
|
Merging as this is a client only feature. |
QuantumExplorer
deleted the
feat/IdentityPublicKeyPrivateKeyValidationMethod
branch
Issue being fixed or feature implemented
This PR introduces the validate_private_key_bytes method to the IdentityPublicKeyHashMethodsV0 trait and implements it for IdentityPublicKeyV0. This new method allows the validation of private key bytes against the public key stored within the identity. The validation ensures that the private key corresponds to the public key and is implemented for various key types such as ECDSA, BLS12-381, ECDSA_HASH160, and EDDSA_25519_HASH160.
What was done?
How Has This Been Tested?
Breaking Changes
None expected as this PR adds a new method and does not modify existing behavior.
Checklist:
For repository code-owners and collaborators only
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Bug Fixes
Chores