fix base64 encoding bug #18
Merged
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
|
Just out of curiosity, after ignoring the unknown character(s), can you actually verify the token signature? |
|
@vzsg yup, the signature verification passes. |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
I was having an issue where the following JWT token was resulting in a
JWTError.decodingI think somewhere in here lies a
\0or some other unknown base64 character. Not quite sure what's causing these to get encoded into the base64--maybe that's an issue with how we're encoding base64 and this should be fixed there.Either way, Core ignores invalid base64 characters when parsing. With that added, this token is working perfectly now.