Security structures setup changes #336
Conversation
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #336 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 92.54% 92.59% +0.04%
==========================================
Files 1152 1155 +3
Lines 25623 25688 +65
Branches 85 85
==========================================
+ Hits 23713 23785 +72
+ Misses 1899 1892 -7
Partials 11 11
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
| self.primary_role | ||
| .validate_threshold_factors() | ||
| .into_matrix_err(RoleKind::Primary)?; | ||
| Ok(()) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why not just:
self.primary_role
.validate_threshold_factors()
.into_matrix_err(RoleKind::Primary)| @@ -0,0 +1,55 @@ | |||
| use crate::prelude::*; | |||
|
|
|||
| /// Represents the status of selected threshold factor sources in the Security Shield building process. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Represents the status of selected threshold factor source
Specifically for Primary Treshold
* Update security structure threshold * Update api and tests * Update default threshold. Add tests * Add test * Fix swift tests * Fix fs removing from primary threshold. Add test * Update naming. Add Threshold ctor
sergiupuhalschi-rdx
added
Rust 🦀
| self.threshold.value(self.threshold_factors.len()) | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| /// How many threshold factors that must be used to perform some function with |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Probably needs a different doc compared to above
| return Some( | ||
| NotYetValidReason::ThresholdHigherThanThresholdFactorsLen, | ||
| ); | ||
| } | ||
| if self.get_threshold() == 0 && !self.get_threshold_factors().is_empty() | ||
| { | ||
| if threshold_value == 0 && !self.get_threshold_factors().is_empty() { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
threshold_value cannot be zero, but I guess can be a paranoia check.
...file/models/security-structures/src/roles_matrices_structures/roles/builder/roles_builder.rs
Show resolved
Hide resolved
This PR slightly changes the existing API around security structures to conform to the UI requirements:
SecurityStructureOfFactorSourceIDsinto the profile to make it possible to save a security structure right after it's been built;selected_factor_sources_for_role_statusintoselected_primary_threshold_factors_statusto validate only the threshold factors of the primary role in isolation. This solves an issue in the hosts when the user selects some threshold factors, proceeds to the next screen, makes the primary role invalid by adding a override factor that breaks the combination rules, and returns to the threshold factors selection at which point the invalid combination error shouldn't be presented if the threshold factors selection is still valid.SelectedPrimaryThresholdFactorsStatus::Invalidwith some error details required in the UI. This makes it possible to display a warning specific to aFactorListKindlike a "Cannot use by itself" warning for the Password section.FactorListKindparameter to theremove_factor_from_primaryto make it possible to remove either from threshold or override list only. Also, it's possible to have the security structure in an invalid state, specifically now a factor can be both in the threshold and override lists, that's why the removal could no longer be based on the fact that it cannot.