-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 10
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
New API for the headers
function
#51
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
3 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The use of an optional vapid key here makes sense to me. I'm tempted to suggest a more open-ended approach here, e.g. allowing the caller to specify arbitrary key-value pairs that get put into the header..but that's probably going to make more opportunities for things to go wrong, so special-casing this
p256ecdsa
field seems fine 👍There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The idea with this one is that the
Crypto-Key
field needs to be merged since there are several sub key-value pairs in its value (dh
andp256ecdsa
), one for Vapid and the other one being specific to the AESGCM scheme (this odd mix has been streamlined in AES128GCM, where the headers part is far easier to pull off). So allowing users to provide the entire key-pair would require them to effectively merge thisCrypto-Key
header themselves using the keys from their Vapid Signature and from the returned AESGCMEncryptedBlock, which I'm trying to avoid here.Apart from this specific case, the function returns an owned
Vec
so it's pretty easy to push new key-value pairs in it if necessary, outside of the function itself.