Switch witness interaction to use the add-checkpoint request
Merge request reports
Activity
assigned to @nisse
Depends on sigsum-go!190 (closed)
added 6 commits
-
999d2d0e...a789a9ef - 2 commits from branch
main
- b9894546 - Switch witness interaction to use the add-checkpoint request
- 9da9862a - Update for SignatureLine -> CosignatureLine change
- 2220278b - Adapt to SignedTreehead as part of Checkpoint
- 32b511b5 - Adapt to removal of checkpoint.Log
Toggle commit list-
999d2d0e...a789a9ef - 2 commits from branch
added 2 commits
added 10 commits
-
5ded0e5d...107b58b3 - 3 commits from branch
main
- a9f9054d - Switch witness interaction to use the add-checkpoint request
- 47c07a77 - Update for SignatureLine -> CosignatureLine change
- ced4192a - Adapt to SignedTreehead as part of Checkpoint
- 028b7cbe - Adapt to removal of checkpoint.Log
- 416df709 - Refactor to delete logInfo type
- df5f535b - Use Checkpoint.Cosign
- bcdd604f - Adapt to Checkpoint.SignedTreeHead change
Toggle commit list-
5ded0e5d...107b58b3 - 3 commits from branch
added 7 commits
-
fa48bb5c...2653b747 - 5 commits from branch
main
- c40d8765 - Update sigsum-go to v0.9.0, adapt to breaking types.Cosignature change
- fb3a4dd2 - Switch witness interaction to use the add-checkpoint request
-
fa48bb5c...2653b747 - 5 commits from branch
Depends on sigsum-go!203 (merged)
added 4 commits
-
a666beb6...e469f4cc - 2 commits from branch
main
- 6fe17dca - Switch witness interaction to use the add-checkpoint request
- 2081c960 - Update sigsum-go dependency to v0.9.1
-
a666beb6...e469f4cc - 2 commits from branch
requested review from @rgdd
- Resolved by Niels Möller
- Resolved by Niels Möller
Looks good! (I reviewed all of witness.go, because that was easier than seeing a diff for something I can't recall looking at. Then quickly looked at the diff and also didn't see anything that stood out then. I didn't review the test cases in detail, but a lot of green so I'm happy about that!)
removed review request for @rgdd
120 125 121 126 cosignatures := make(map[crypto.Hash]types.Cosignature) 122 127 for i := range ch { 123 128 // TODO: Check that cosignature timestamp is reasonable? Would make sense to me to warn if timestamp is more than one second into the future (indicates broken clock synchronization), or more than a few minutes old (since some delay is not particularly harmful, and I can imagine valid(?) configurations with considerable delay, e.g., a witness returning an old cached cosignature for some time if tree head is unchanged and making a fresh cosignature is expensive). But leaving for a later MR.
mentioned in commit 4a85762e