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

Update ActivityPubFetchService, fix authorized_fetch support #4504

Merged
merged 3 commits into from Jun 26, 2023
Merged

Conversation

dansup
Copy link
Member

@dansup dansup commented Jun 26, 2023

Closes #1850, #2713 and #2935

@ThatOneCalculator
Copy link

As per https://w3c-ccg.github.io/security-vocab/contexts/security-v1.jsonld , Misskey/Calckey actually use sec: prefixes for secure fetch signatures: https://codeberg.org/calckey/calckey/src/commit/e53d1f6bdc6fbb8da2d0b75c1b294708e7244058/packages/backend/src/remote/activitypub/misc/contexts.ts#L99-L137

Is there a reason for using toot:Ed25519Signature, toot:Ed25519Key etc?

@trwnh
Copy link
Member

trwnh commented Jun 27, 2023

Ed25519Signature is not the same as Ed25519Signature2018. the former is taken from mastodon's context for end-to-end encrypted messaging, which was added in mastodon 3.2.0 (and i'm guessing dansup copied the context directly from mastodon): https://github.com/mastodon/mastodon/blob/9caa0475f891ded573739cd00e7bc915b31abb12/app/helpers/context_helper.rb#L24

additionally, the exact prefixes should not matter; term ids should be expanded to the full IRI as defined by @context. if calckey is using Ed25519Signature2018 for anything, they should be prepared to accept https://w3id.org/security#Ed25519Signature2018 as the unambiguous id for that.

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.

ActivityPub GET requests are not signed
3 participants