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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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
Implemented CASEServer to fetch credentials, and wait for SigmaR1 #6791
Implemented CASEServer to fetch credentials, and wait for SigmaR1 #6791
Changes from 1 commit
bb08a09
cbafbd8
7f8751d
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Indexing and lookup up by Admin ID breaks scoping. Per the spec, the admin must be located based upon the root PK of the root CA for the requesting agent.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
That makes sense. We can do that as part of multi admin feature.
Would you prefer if I updated the above comment as part of this PR?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
A TODO seems appropriate. It doesn't have to happen now. I'm just pointing out that this code does not appear to be compliant with the
4.369 Validate Sigma1
algorithm.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Updated the TODO here: https://github.com/project-chip/connectedhomeip/pull/6810/files#diff-c9e9c579ef5bbdbb97683c09136f253a842efdbb8d8febaf3e92ca12b47a0dddR56
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The fact that we end up having to make copies of this stuff is not great. Ideally we would just hold on to the right admin and use these things in-place from there. Followup for that?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I am expecting some refactor/cleanup once CASE state machine is hooked up on controller and device side. A lot of these overheads will iron out at that point.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
So here, if we stored the certs as a ChipCertificateSet to start with, couldn't we just return a const ref to it?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I am expecting some refactor/cleanup once CASE state machine is hooked up on controller and device side. A lot of these overheads will iron out at that point.