Skip to content

Conversation

@ChrisMacNaughton
Copy link
Member

When using the password custom data type, the value will
be hashed using the same method as regular user password
hashing before storing it in the database. This maintains
alignment with integrations that may want to shift from
using the password for a user to app specific passwords.

Additionally, this reduces the necessity for brakeman ignores
by adding explicit validation for custom data types.

Closes #291

When using the password custom data type, the value will
be hashed using the same method as regular user password
hashing before storing it in the database. This maintains
alignment with integrations that may want to shift from
using the password for a user to app specific passwords.

Closes #291
@ChrisMacNaughton ChrisMacNaughton force-pushed the extra-attribute-validation branch from c557128 to cb3582c Compare November 24, 2021 09:03
@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Nov 24, 2021

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+0.2%) to 88.709% when pulling 99e117e on extra-attribute-validation into 83a8d21 on main.

@ChrisMacNaughton ChrisMacNaughton force-pushed the extra-attribute-validation branch from 37f24a3 to 99e117e Compare November 24, 2021 10:21
@ChrisMacNaughton ChrisMacNaughton merged commit b16ef5f into main Nov 24, 2021
@ChrisMacNaughton ChrisMacNaughton deleted the extra-attribute-validation branch November 24, 2021 10:43
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.

It should support a "password" type extra attributes

3 participants