Skip to content

require JWT keys to be exactly 32 bytes #242

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

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jun 27, 2022
Merged

require JWT keys to be exactly 32 bytes #242

merged 2 commits into from
Jun 27, 2022

Conversation

tersec
Copy link
Contributor

@tersec tersec commented Jun 20, 2022

Many lines had trailing whitespace and inconsistent capitalization of acronyms.

djrtwo
djrtwo approved these changes Jun 20, 2022
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@djrtwo djrtwo left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

lgtm. thanks!

@lightclient
Copy link
Member

Seems to be unhappy that "CLs" isn't a word. Do you mind adding it to the word list?

mkalinin
mkalinin approved these changes Jun 21, 2022
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@mkalinin mkalinin left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM 👍

@rauljordan
Copy link

Hi @tersec and @mkalinin just want to bring up this issue from @prestonvanloon here #208. We don't understand why we need JWT secrets as strictly-formatted hex strings in the spec, when plaintext passwords could be used for a cleaner UX

@mkalinin
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @tersec and @mkalinin just want to bring up this issue from @prestonvanloon here #208. We don't understand why we need JWT secrets as strictly-formatted hex strings in the spec, when plaintext passwords could be used for a cleaner UX

I don't think that issue is relevant to this PR. This PR is about making the length requirement consistent across the spec, it doesn't attempt to change requirements on the length of the secret.

Let's take this discussion into the issue (I have commented on it).

@lightclient lightclient added the A-engine Area: for future consideration label Jun 22, 2022
@djrtwo djrtwo merged commit a285d13 into ethereum:main Jun 27, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@mkalinin mkalinin mkalinin approved these changes

+1 more reviewer

@djrtwo djrtwo djrtwo approved these changes

Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
A-engine Area: for future consideration
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
5 participants
@tersec @lightclient @rauljordan @mkalinin @djrtwo