Delegation engine with optional Cedar authorization #550
Conversation
cykoder
changed the title
examples/src/delegation.js
Outdated
| issuanceDate: new Date().toISOString(), | ||
| credentialSubject: { | ||
| id: DELEGATE_DID, | ||
| [MAY_CLAIM_IRI]: ['creditScore'], |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
do you have an example of referencing a nested attribute anywhere?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
initially i thought of this with just root level claims, but i think itd be useful to support jsonpath based claims too for more complex scenarios. will update
There was a problem hiding this comment.
added tests and this example also now uses nested attributes too via jsonpath
|
|
||
| const DELEGATION_TYPE_URIS = new Set([ | ||
| 'DelegationCredential', | ||
| 'https://ld.truvera.io/credentials/delegation#DelegationCredential', |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
do all delegated credentials need to include this context?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this isnt a context but an expanded IRI of the type. but the defined context, yes all delegation credentials need it as it defines the extensions we use (root credential id etc)
| return { verified, results: [presentation], credentialResults }; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // Skip proof validation for unsigned |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
surprising that we weren't doing this before
| C -->|missing context or id| F | ||
| C --> D[Build chains + summaries] | ||
| D -->|cycle or missing link| F | ||
| D --> E[Generate rify premises & rules] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
is rify explained elsewhere? I certainly didn't know what it was until you explained it on the call last week
There was a problem hiding this comment.
its not, thought it might be in the existing claim deduction docs but apparently isnt
| @@ -0,0 +1,650 @@ | |||
| /* eslint-disable sonarjs/cognitive-complexity */ | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
anything we can do with this file so we don't have to disable the complexity check?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
can refactor a few functions into other functions, but not sure if its really worth the effort. at some point it becomes more complex to read with it all split off (also time investment)
if you feel strongly about it we could do that but im fine with the current cognitive complexity of the methods here
mike-parkhill
left a comment
mike-parkhill
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Generally looks okay, just a few comments
No description provided.