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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

feature/SDK-59 #299

Open
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: develop
Choose a base branch
from
Open

feature/SDK-59 #299

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
3 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
29f3a23
chore: Select AssertionProofPurpose when only challenge is missing
sanderPostma Jan 9, 2025
1a2419b
chore: Select AssertionProofPurpose when only challenge is missing
sanderPostma Jan 9, 2025
2fae6e6
Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/feature/SDK-59' into feature/SDK-59
sanderPostma Jan 9, 2025
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
4 changes: 2 additions & 2 deletions packages/vc-handler-ld-local/src/ld-credential-module.ts
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -115,7 +115,7 @@ export class LdCredentialModule {
verificationMethodId: string,
challenge: string | undefined,
domain: string | undefined,
purpose: typeof ProofPurpose = !challenge && !domain
purpose: typeof ProofPurpose = !challenge // domain is not a mandatory var for AuthenticationProofPurpose per se, but challenge is.
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I only miss to have unit tests for this module, to verify regressions

Copy link
Contributor

@nklomp nklomp Jan 10, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Has this change been verified to be correct to begin with in the specs @sanderPostma? The fact the underlying Veramo functions allow for it doesn't mean this change is correct. I cannot remember a need ever to not have both.

Actually I do not even want this change, as it would promote not binding a domain to a proof

? new AssertionProofPurpose()
: new AuthenticationProofPurpose({
domain,
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -212,7 +212,7 @@ export class LdCredentialModule {
domain: string | undefined,
context: IAgentContext<RequiredAgentMethods>,
fetchRemoteContexts = false,
presentationPurpose: typeof ProofPurpose = !challenge && !domain
presentationPurpose: typeof ProofPurpose = !challenge // domain is not a mandatory var for AuthenticationProofPurpose per se, but challenge is.
? new AssertionProofPurpose()
: new AuthenticationProofPurpose({ domain, challenge }),
checkStatus?: Function,
Expand Down
Loading