Regression: Certificate data is corrupted during base64 conversion #727
Conversation
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
The bug during which certificates become corrupt was introduced in a521b23. It turns out some data was not being truncated after being promoted to an integer, causing 1s to be ORed into the index number when they should not have been. I only intended to remove the & 255 from the other side, where the & 63 would have rendered that operation redundant. I apologize for this error. I made the appropriate changes I intended to make in this new PR. Please merge and make a new release if possible. Thank you so much!
|
@zdohnal @tillkamppeter @michaelrsweet Again but this time for the 2.4.x branch since I think we should make a hotfix out of this one. |
|
I'll release the hotfix today. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
The bug during which certificates become corrupt was introduced in a521b23. It turns out some data was not being truncated after being promoted to an integer, causing 1s to be ORed into the index number when they should not have been.
I only intended to remove the & 255 from the other side, where the & 63 would have rendered that operation redundant.
I apologize for this error. I made the appropriate changes I intended to make in this new PR.
Please merge and make a new release if possible.
Thank you so much!