Improved type safety tests #494
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
Add a utility function which calls the provided closure for all possible combination of arguments from the provided arrays. This function allows testing multiple combinations of various invalid arguments and ensure that we don't miss any of them. Enjoy your dynamic typing experience.
Add tests to verify that key generation functions do not accept any generally invalid arguments, such as "null", "undefined", etc. We accept only byte arrays. No strings, no integer arrays, no promises of arrays. Just Monika^W bytes.
|
Currently this covers only key generation. I'll add tests for other cryptosystems into this PR once they are merged. |
Ensure that we disallow any unexpected types in Secure Cell input.
There are a few exceptions from the generally invalid types:
- Secure Cell accepts "null" values for context in Seal and
Token Protect modes. But not for other arguments, and not
in the Context Imprint mode.
- Context Imprint mode has a custom error for "undefined" context
value which is possible if the user omits the context argument
(mistakingly assuming that it is optional)
In all other cases we expect a TypeError to be thrown.
Ensure that we disallow any unexpected types in Secure Message input. The expectations are regular. However, in Secure Message constructor we produce Themis errors instead of TypeErrors.
Ensure that we disallow any unexpected types in Secure Comparator.
Ensure that we disallow any unexpected types in Secure Session.
Actually, keys cannot be constructed from any string at the moment, but let's test this specifically because we rely on PrivateKey and PublicKey to contain valid non-empty keys at all times.
|
I've added type checks for all cryptosystems. Hopefully, I did not miss any API entry point. @vixentael, there's also an additional check for empty strings when constructing keys. |
It turned out that I did not actually need that combinatorial hack so replace it with a more straightforward forEach loop. Well, that was a nice exercise.
vixentael
approved these changes
Jul 10, 2019
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.
JavaScript is dynamically typed, therefore it is highly likely that at some point one of our users will try using something that's not supposed to be used with Themis functions. Add some more tests to ensure that we do cover all the bases and do not accept invalid arguments when we do not support them.
There are quite a few cases that we need to cover:
null&undefined(but sometimesnullis allowed)I don't want to miss any of these by chance, and it will be nice to be able to add or remove exceptions for all tests simultaneously. I have added a helper functions to enumerate all possible combinations for arguments. Hopefully it should make it easier to write combinatorial tests.