Skip to content
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

Additional integration tests for revocation scenarios #2055

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Dec 22, 2022

Conversation

ianco
Copy link
Member

@ianco ianco commented Dec 21, 2022

Signed-off-by: Ian Costanzo [email protected]

Additional tests for multi-credential proofs with a mix of revocable and non-revocable credentials

These tests pass:

  • @T003-RFC0454.1 - two credentials, one revocable one not, neither revoked, "non_revoked" is requested at the attribute level
  • @T003-RFC0454.2 - two credentials, one revocable one not, one revoked, proof checks for revocation (attribute level) and fails
  • @T003-RFC0454.3 - two credentials, one revocable one not, one revoked, proof doesn't check for revocation (attribute level) and passes

This test "fails" - the proof doesn't verify even though it should:

  • @T003-RFC0454.1f - two credentials, one revocable one not, neither revoked, "non_revoked" is requested at therequest level

For the failing scenario, it fails with indy-sdk and credx. I believe the underlying library is not creating the proof properly, and/or the underlying anoncreds itself has a bug.

@ianco ianco requested a review from swcurran December 21, 2022 00:15
@sonarcloud
Copy link

sonarcloud bot commented Dec 22, 2022

Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!    Quality Gate passed

Bug A 0 Bugs
Vulnerability A 0 Vulnerabilities
Security Hotspot A 0 Security Hotspots
Code Smell A 0 Code Smells

No Coverage information No Coverage information
No Duplication information No Duplication information

@ianco ianco marked this pull request as ready for review December 22, 2022 19:15
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants