[native] Expose verifySignature function via JSI
ClosedPublic
Actions

Authored by bartek on Mon, May 6, 7:18 AM.

Details

Reviewers

kamil
marcin

Commits

rCOMM3f690be08196: [native] Expose verifySignature function via JSI

Summary

This function is needed to verify device list signatures. It was already there in CryptoModule but not yet exposed via JSI.

Test Plan

await commCoreModule.initializeCryptoAccount();
const pubKey = await getContentSigningKey();
const signature = await commCoreModule.signMessage('hello');

try {
  await commCoreModule.verifySignature(pubKey, 'hello', signature);
  console.log('OK');
} catch (err) {
  console.warn(err);
}

Changing the message or signature returns BAD_MESSAGE_MAC

Diff Detail

Repository

rCOMM Comm

Lint

Lint Not Applicable

Unit

Tests Not Applicable

Event Timeline

bartek created this revision.Mon, May 6, 7:18 AM

bartek held this revision as a draft.

Herald added subscribers: tomek, ashoat. · View Herald TranscriptMon, May 6, 7:18 AM

bartek added a child revision: D11907: [lib] Add function to ed25519 verify message to OlmAPI.Mon, May 6, 7:21 AM

Harbormaster completed remote builds in B28701: Diff 39849.Mon, May 6, 7:35 AM

bartek published this revision for review.Mon, May 6, 8:15 AM

marcin accepted this revision.Mon, May 6, 9:34 AM

This revision is now accepted and ready to land.Mon, May 6, 9:34 AM

marcin added inline comments.Mon, May 6, 9:37 AM

native/schema/CommCoreModuleSchema.js
140 ↗	(On Diff #39849)	Sorry for suggesting this after accepting the diff but it occurred to me only after I saw the child diff - it is a bad design for a signature verification to throw if the signature is bad. I think it would be better to implement it to return boolean.

bartek added inline comments.Mon, May 6, 10:42 PM

native/schema/CommCoreModuleSchema.js
140 ↗	(On Diff #39849)	Yeah I'd love to have it return boolean too. The reason I decided to throw is to keep consistent with JS counterpart on web and our function in `CryptoModule`: Olm's JS counterpart (`ed25519_verify()`): declaration, usage example Our CryptoModule verifySignature() implementation Olm C API docs say that this is the way of distinguishing different failure causes.

kamil accepted this revision.Tue, May 7, 2:23 AM

marcin added inline comments.Tue, May 7, 2:42 AM

native/schema/CommCoreModuleSchema.js
140 ↗	(On Diff #39849)	If there are multiple reasons for verification failure and the JS version throws anyway then it justifies this approach. On the other hand we are actually not doing anything with this error details. How about returning to JS some thing like: { +error?: string, +success?: 'true' } ?

bartek added inline comments.Wed, May 8, 11:56 PM

native/schema/CommCoreModuleSchema.js
140 ↗	(On Diff #39849)	Played with this a bit and I think your proposal makes more sense on the JS side (in olmAPI - child diff). This way, we can also do it for web