-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 31
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
Add Rekor Bundle message #262
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
de70969
to
04b7b58
Compare
Signed-off-by: Lily Sturmann <lsturman@redhat.com>
|
||
// The RekorBundle is the signed material used to produce the Signed Entry | ||
// Timestamp signature. See notes on the InclusionPromise above. | ||
message RekorBundle { |
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.
Have we confirmed that when marshalled as json as canonicalized, this works as expected? Just want to make sure there's no issues with field naming.
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 can run some tests soon. No need to wait on this PR for the new release.
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.
@lkatalin I'll plan to include this in a 0.3.2 release with the other change for the checkpoint key ID that just went in.
|
||
// The RekorBundle is the signed material used to produce the Signed Entry | ||
// Timestamp signature. See notes on the InclusionPromise above. | ||
message RekorBundle { |
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.
naming nit: I don't want to proliferate "bundle" even though it's in cosign, given we want "bundle" to refer to top level protobuf bundle now. Do you have another suggestion of the name? SignedEntryTimestampContents?
Related to #261
Related to sigstore/rekor#1943
I'm considering whether the RekorBundle struct would make more sense as bytes (like the
canonicalized body
), with the tradeoff of readability, so I may update this. (Or possibly we could have both, but that may be too verbose.)Edit: Updated based on the conversation in #261 to be separate from the TLE message.