Skip to content

Conversation

@bobcallaway
Copy link
Member

Summary

Release Note

Documentation

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 17, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (ca115c9) 47.62% compared to head (b209631) 66.44%.
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1958       +/-   ##
===========================================
+ Coverage   47.62%   66.44%   +18.82%     
===========================================
  Files          92       92               
  Lines        9197     9207       +10     
===========================================
+ Hits         4380     6118     +1738     
+ Misses       3941     2345     -1596     
+ Partials      876      744      -132     
Flag Coverage Δ
e2etests 47.61% <44.44%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
unittests 47.31% <100.00%> (?)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

return nil, nil, err
}
if err := sigObj.Verify(nil, keyObj, options.WithDigest(decoded)); err != nil {
if err := sigObj.Verify(nil, keyObj, options.WithDigest(decoded), options.WithCryptoSignerOpts(alg)); err != nil {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

nit for another file: Should we add a comment that the digest in

verifier, err := sigsig.LoadVerifier(p, crypto.SHA256)
is a default? I was looking through the code and was initially uncertain if that needed to be modified too.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

it is a default, so we should probably add that comment. the WithCryptoSignerOpts() already provides a way to override the algorithm.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think I was missing this in my PR #1945 .

@bobcallaway
Copy link
Member Author

Closed in deference to #1959

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.

3 participants