remove identifiers from structs that are communicated #397
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
…ing for SigningCommitments for ristretto255
conradoplg
force-pushed
the
remove-identifier
branch
from
d983da3
to
4cdb6cd
Compare
conradoplg
changed the title
conradoplg
force-pushed
the
remove-identifier
branch
from
fc44769
to
02c3caa
Compare
Codecov ReportPatch coverage:
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #397 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 71.16% 71.40% +0.23%
==========================================
Files 30 30
Lines 2719 2668 -51
==========================================
- Hits 1935 1905 -30
+ Misses 784 763 -21
☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
conradoplg
force-pushed
the
remove-identifier
branch
from
2bdbcb0
to
c7d5636
Compare
conradoplg
force-pushed
the
remove-identifier
branch
from
f141c31
to
47652a5
Compare
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Sending identifiers inside the structs may be problematic because it's used as the source for pinpointing cheaters when there is an error in the protocol. Even if we got rid of that, callers could mistakenly look inside the struct to find the identifier of the cheater.
This moves identifiers out of structs, and changes the API so that the caller must specify the identifier of the package being fed into the API. This will make more likely that the caller will get the identifier from the right place (from whatever mapping they have between identifiers and authenticated channels) since there is no other obvious place they could grab identifiers from.
This also makes some code a lot more straightforward, and allowed getting rid of
SignatureResponsestruct, though I had to use a workaround to encode it with serde since it's mostly an exception, and had to introduce aSignatureShareHelperbut that's completely private and invisible to the user.