Fix use of certificate validity policy in CHIPDeviceController. #26405
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
In CHIPDeviceControllerFactory we were using the provided validity policy for our CASE server (i.e. when acting as a CASE responder), but not for our CASE client (i.e. not when acting as CASE initiator). As a result, when acting as a CASE client we ended up using the default validity policy for the NOC provided by the other side, instead of using the one that was passed in via the FactoryInitParams.
pullapprove
bot
requested review from
amitnj,
andy31415,
anush-apple,
arkq,
carol-apple,
chrisdecenzo,
chshu,
chulspro,
cliffamzn,
Damian-Nordic,
dhrishi,
electrocucaracha,
franck-apple,
gjc13,
harsha-rajendran,
hawk248,
jelderton,
jepenven-silabs,
jmartinez-silabs,
jmeg-sfy,
joonhaengHeo,
jtung-apple,
kcoppock,
kkasperczyk-no,
ksperling-apple,
lazarkov,
lpbeliveau-silabs and
LuDuda
pullapprove
bot
requested review from
msandstedt,
mspang,
nivi-apple,
robszewczyk,
saurabhst,
selissia,
sharadb-amazon,
tcarmelveilleux,
tecimovic,
tehampson,
turon,
vijs,
vivien-apple,
woody-apple,
xylophone21,
younghak-hwang,
yufengwangca and
yunhanw-google
|
PR #26405: Size comparison from c984f0b to 28cbf5e Decreases (1 build for cc32xx)
Full report (1 build for cc32xx)
|
ksperling-apple
approved these changes
May 7, 2023
tcarmelveilleux
approved these changes
May 9, 2023
bzbarsky-apple
added a commit
to bzbarsky-apple/connectedhomeip
that referenced
this pull request
May 12, 2023
…ect-chip#26405) In CHIPDeviceControllerFactory we were using the provided validity policy for our CASE server (i.e. when acting as a CASE responder), but not for our CASE client (i.e. not when acting as CASE initiator). As a result, when acting as a CASE client we ended up using the default validity policy for the NOC provided by the other side, instead of using the one that was passed in via the FactoryInitParams.
andy31415
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 12, 2023
…) (#26529) In CHIPDeviceControllerFactory we were using the provided validity policy for our CASE server (i.e. when acting as a CASE responder), but not for our CASE client (i.e. not when acting as CASE initiator). As a result, when acting as a CASE client we ended up using the default validity policy for the NOC provided by the other side, instead of using the one that was passed in via the FactoryInitParams.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
In CHIPDeviceControllerFactory we were using the provided validity policy for our CASE server (i.e. when acting as a CASE responder), but not for our CASE client (i.e. not when acting as CASE initiator).
As a result, when acting as a CASE client we ended up using the default validity policy for the NOC provided by the other side, instead of using the one that was passed in via the FactoryInitParams.