assert canonical base64 on top level properties #11
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
|
note, this PR depends on ssbc/ssb-ref#21 |
|
Yeah, non-metadata strings don't need to be verified in any special way. They need to adhere to some constraints, but the js implementation enforces those automatically through the JSON.encode(JSON.decode()) roundtrip. As for unambiguous detection of cypherlinks, that's something hsdt will (most likely) add to ssb. |
|
Can you push https://github.com/dominictarr/is-canonical-base64? |
|
pushed.
…On 10/24/18, Anders Rune Jensen ***@***.***> wrote:
Can you push https://github.com/dominictarr/is-canonical-base64?
--
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#11 (comment)
|
|
merged in f1dd1cd |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
previous, author, signatureandcontent(if it's a string) are now checked to be valid canonical base64 strings. strings inside content are not checked (they may be inside markdown text anyway) are not checked.It makes sense that another implementation may wish to encode the top level object in a binary representation, but I think if they encounter strings within the content that are not canonical base64 they should consider them invalid, and just represent them as arbitrary strings.
@AljoschaMeyer