Skip to content
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 a store for backup keys #1271

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Mar 20, 2020
Merged

Add a store for backup keys #1271

merged 2 commits into from
Mar 20, 2020

Conversation

foldleft
Copy link
Contributor

@foldleft foldleft requested a review from a team March 19, 2020 15:31
@dbkr dbkr requested review from dbkr and removed request for a team March 20, 2020 10:02
Copy link
Member

@dbkr dbkr left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is there a reason the js-sdk / stores need to treat the backup key specially rather than just any other cached ssss key?

@foldleft
Copy link
Contributor Author

I suppose not, I just thought semantically that storeCrossSigningPrivateKey didn't seem right. Perhaps we could rename this storeSSSSPrivateKey and use that instead?

More broadly, I was doing it like this because the entire process looks like it has to happen differently, and I guess I figured different things look different.

@foldleft foldleft requested a review from dbkr March 20, 2020 10:09
Copy link
Member

@dbkr dbkr left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks - hopefully having fewer different methods floating around will ultimately help simplicity.

@foldleft
Copy link
Contributor Author

yeah, good catch

@foldleft foldleft merged commit 6a7a255 into develop Mar 20, 2020
@foldleft foldleft deleted the foldleft/12704-key-storage branch March 20, 2020 11:17
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants