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.

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

/identities/modules response is missing the "auth" section #56

Open
micahl opened this issue Oct 24, 2020 · 3 comments
Open

/identities/modules response is missing the "auth" section #56

micahl opened this issue Oct 24, 2020 · 3 comments
Labels
documentation Improvements or additions to documentation

Comments

@micahl
Copy link
Contributor

micahl commented Oct 24, 2020

Per the docs for the /identity/modules request each module identity in the response should include the below, but it isn't.

Note: I do see it in the response from "/identities/identity" and "/identities/modules/{module-id}"

        "auth": {
            "type": "sas",
            "keyHandle": "string"
        }
@arsing arsing removed their assignment Oct 24, 2020
@arsing
Copy link
Member

arsing commented Oct 24, 2020

It should definitely not include the keyHandle because it would be inappropriate. Rajeev can decide whether type and certId are worth including. (They're not private information but IMO it's still not worth including it, so it would be fine to remove it from the docs to match the implementation.)

@micahl
Copy link
Contributor Author

micahl commented Oct 24, 2020

Would it depend on whether the idtype was set to device or module. For example, if it's device then the info is included, but if module then not?

@arsing
Copy link
Member

arsing commented Oct 25, 2020

Would what depend? The keyHandle should not be in list responses period, if that's what you're asking.

@arsing arsing added the documentation Improvements or additions to documentation label Mar 4, 2021
kodiakhq bot pushed a commit that referenced this issue Jun 3, 2022
Drop the API to update module identity
Change docs to resolve issue #56
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
documentation Improvements or additions to documentation
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants