feat: add initial implementation for DIM wallet stub

[nitin-vavdiya]

Description

Initial contribution for SSI DIM wallet stub application

1. Spring boot application
2. README and other documentation
3. GitHub Workflows
4. GitHub action
5. AUTHORS.md updated
6. Basic and working helm charts. No config added for Keycloak dependency

Why

Issue Link

Refs: 788

Checklist

Please delete options that are not relevant.

• I have followed the contributing guidelines

• I have performed IP checks for added or updated 3rd party libraries

• I have added copyright and license headers, footers (for .md files) or files (for images) //open source requirement

• I have performed a self-review of my own code

• I have successfully tested my changes locally

• I have added tests and updated existing tests that prove my changes work

• I have checked that new and existing tests pass locally with my changes

• I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas

[gitguardian]

⚠️ GitGuardian has uncovered 6 secrets following the scan of your pull request.

Please consider investigating the findings and remediating the incidents. Failure to do so may lead to compromising the associated services or software components.

Since your pull request originates from a forked repository, GitGuardian is not able to associate the secrets uncovered with secret incidents on your GitGuardian dashboard.
Skipping this check run and merging your pull request will create secret incidents on your GitGuardian dashboard.

🔎 Detected hardcoded secrets in your pull request

GitGuardian id	GitGuardian status	Secret	Commit	Filename
-	-	Generic High Entropy Secret	0907bfe	src/main/java/org/eclipse/tractusx/wallet/stub/apidoc/TokenApiDoc.java	View secret
-	-	Generic High Entropy Secret	0907bfe	docs/api/openAPI.json	View secret
-	-	Generic High Entropy Secret	0907bfe	src/main/java/org/eclipse/tractusx/wallet/stub/apidoc/EDCStubApiDoc.java	View secret
-	-	Generic High Entropy Secret	0907bfe	docs/api/openAPI.json	View secret
-	-	Generic High Entropy Secret	0907bfe	docs/api/openAPI.json	View secret
-	-	Generic High Entropy Secret	0907bfe	src/main/java/org/eclipse/tractusx/wallet/stub/apidoc/CredentialsApiDoc.java	View secret

🛠 Guidelines to remediate hardcoded secrets

1. Understand the implications of revoking this secret by investigating where it is used in your code.
2. Replace and store your secrets safely. Learn here the best practices.
3. Revoke and rotate these secrets.
4. If possible, rewrite git history. Rewriting git history is not a trivial act. You might completely break other contributing developers' workflow and you risk accidentally deleting legitimate data.

To avoid such incidents in the future consider

• following these best practices for managing and storing secrets including API keys and other credentials
• install secret detection on pre-commit to catch secret before it leaves your machine and ease remediation.

---

^{🦉 GitGuardian detects secrets in your source code to help developers and security teams secure the modern development process. You are seeing this because you or someone else with access to this repository has authorized GitGuardian to scan your pull request.}

[nitin-vavdiya]

All secret alerts are false positives. These values are used as a sample request in API doc

[nitin-vavdiya]

IP review ticket created: https://gitlab.eclipse.org/eclipsefdn/emo-team/iplab/-/issues/15838

[evegufy]

Looks good in general, just some notes

[evegufy]

could you please make sure that your pr title aligns better with conventional commit messages? for instance feat: add initial implementation for DIM wallet stub
Also, please take care of the GitGuardian findings: you mentioned that they were false positives, with you committer rights you are enabled to mark them accordingly

[evegufy]

I also noticed that the following lib is still marked as restricted in the DEPENDENCIES file:

maven/mavencentral/org.wiremock/wiremock-standalone/3.9.1, (Apache-2.0 AND EPL-2.0) OR (Apache-2.0 AND GPL-2.0-only AND NOASSERTION), restricted, clearlydefined

Did you create an IP issue? If so, could you link it?

I think you should only open the IP issue for the project content / initial contribution once also the all 3rd party libs are vetted.

[evegufy]

@nitin-vavdiya I'm providing already some information for the review of the project content, which should only be started once you're sure that this PR remains as is / unchanged, so only once #2 (review) is solved.

Relevant section in the Eclipse Foundation Handbook: https://www.eclipse.org/projects/handbook/#ip-project-content

As this PR represents the initial contribution and contains changes which were authored - not just by you (committer) but -also by contributors (see Authors), it needs to undergo a review of Project Content at the Eclipse Foundation, for which you (as committer) need to open an issue in Gitlab using the the according issue template, see https://gitlab.eclipse.org/eclipsefdn/emo-team/iplab/-/wikis/Requesting-a-Review.

Besides the Basic Information, please also provide additional information about why this review of Project Content is needed (like that this is an code initial contribution).

Here an example of a recent review of Project content, merely as example https://gitlab.eclipse.org/eclipsefdn/emo-team/iplab/-/issues/15836.
There it was also mentioned that it's a good idea to upload the state of the feature branch of the pull request (which isn't changed again) in a zip file to the IP issue in Gitlab, see https://gitlab.eclipse.org/eclipsefdn/emo-team/iplab/-/issues/15836#note_2617332, you can download a zip file by using the according GH feature:

[nitin-vavdiya]

I also noticed that the following lib is still marked as restricted in the DEPENDENCIES file:

maven/mavencentral/org.wiremock/wiremock-standalone/3.9.1, (Apache-2.0 AND EPL-2.0) OR (Apache-2.0 AND GPL-2.0-only AND NOASSERTION), restricted, clearlydefined

Did you create an IP issue? If so, could you link it?

I think you should only open the IP issue for the project content / initial contribution once also the all 3rd party libs are vetted.

Thanks for pointing this out.

I already create IP check for the restricted lib: IP issue
Further, this is used for testing only, I refactor tests and removed this dependency. Ref: 8a041c3

I closed this IP check issue for WireMock.

Now there is no any restricted lib in the code.

[nitin-vavdiya]

could you please make sure that your pr title aligns better with conventional commit messages? for instance feat: add initial implementation for DIM wallet stub Also, please take care of the GitGuardian findings: you mentioned that they were false positives, with you committer rights you are enabled to mark them accordingly

PR title changed

I cannot see this repository in the GitGuardian app. maybe someone needs to give access.

[nitin-vavdiya]

@nitin-vavdiya I'm providing already some information for the review of the project content, which should only be started once you're sure that this PR remains as is / unchanged, so only once #2 (review) is solved.

Relevant section in the Eclipse Foundation Handbook: https://www.eclipse.org/projects/handbook/#ip-project-content

As this PR represents the initial contribution and contains changes which were authored - not just by you (committer) but -also by contributors (see Authors), it needs to undergo a review of Project Content at the Eclipse Foundation, for which you (as committer) need to open an issue in Gitlab using the the according issue template, see https://gitlab.eclipse.org/eclipsefdn/emo-team/iplab/-/wikis/Requesting-a-Review.

Besides the Basic Information, please also provide additional information about why this review of Project Content is needed (like that this is an code initial contribution).

Here an example of a recent review of Project content, merely as example https://gitlab.eclipse.org/eclipsefdn/emo-team/iplab/-/issues/15836. There it was also mentioned that it's a good idea to upload the state of the feature branch of the pull request (which isn't changed again) in a zip file to the IP issue in Gitlab, see https://gitlab.eclipse.org/eclipsefdn/emo-team/iplab/-/issues/15836#note_2617332, you can download a zip file by using the according GH feature:

Thank you for the information.

IP check ticket is created: https://gitlab.eclipse.org/eclipsefdn/emo-team/iplab/-/issues/15838

[nitin-vavdiya]

As a source code ZIP file is uploaded in IP check,
Additional changes will be made in separate pull requests, unless the changes are mandatory.

[evegufy]

could you please make sure that your pr title aligns better with conventional commit messages? for instance feat: add initial implementation for DIM wallet stub Also, please take care of the GitGuardian findings: you mentioned that they were false positives, with you committer rights you are enabled to mark them accordingly

@nitin-vavdiya I'd find it odd if you couldn't manage the secret findings by GitGuardian with your committer rights.. don't you have the option to Skip when going to the Details of the check?

[nitin-vavdiya]

could you please make sure that your pr title aligns better with conventional commit messages? for instance feat: add initial implementation for DIM wallet stub Also, please take care of the GitGuardian findings: you mentioned that they were false positives, with you committer rights you are enabled to mark them accordingly

@nitin-vavdiya I'd find it odd if you couldn't manage the secret findings by GitGuardian with your committer rights.. don't you have the option to Skip when going to the Details of the check?

Done, I was looking for resolve issue like button, so it will not rise the same issue again (Same as sonarQube maybe)
Thanks

I'm dismissing the review as I'm heading to vacation for a couple of weeks. Feel free to merge the PR once the IP review has been approved: https://gitlab.eclipse.org/eclipsefdn/emo-team/iplab/-/issues/15838

[nitin-vavdiya]

Merging this PR based on this comment