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 documentation and test for new oeverify tool #1761

Merged
merged 8 commits into from
Oct 15, 2020

Conversation

jumaffre
Copy link
Contributor

Now that Open Enclave's host_verify has been replaced with oeverify (0.12-rc1 release), I've updated the documentation and added a new test to verify node's quote with this tool.

Note that /node/quote used to return an array of one quote. I've changed this slightly so that it returns the quote info directly (slightly easier to parse).

@jumaffre jumaffre requested a review from a team as a code owner October 14, 2020 16:00

.. code-block:: bash

$ curl https://<ccf-node-address>/node/quote --cacert networkcert.pem | jq .quotes[0].raw | xxd -r -p > ccf_node_quote.bin
$ curl https://<ccf-node-address>/node/quote --cacert networkcert.pem | jq .raw | xxd -r -p > ccf_node_quote.bin
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

General question here: Do we want to still refer to CCF node's quotes as "quotes" (SGX terminology) or Open Enclave's more generic "evidences"?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Let's stick with quote for now, there's enough renaming going on at the moment, and there's no short term prospect of using anything other than SGX.

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Oct 14, 2020

verify_quote_test@14306 aka 20201014.41 vs master ewma over 50 builds from 13691 to 14303
images

CHANGELOG.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
## [0.12.1]
### Changed
- Release tarball replaced by a .deb

### Fixed
- Fix LVI build for applications using CCF (#1466)

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I would prefer we avoid reformatting unless we have an automatic formatter, such as markdownlint.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

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