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

feat(webauthn): add WithChallenge login option #359

Merged

Conversation

Daedaluz
Copy link
Contributor

This option customizes the challenge sent to the client.
Can be used as a form of document signing method.

Closes #353

This option customizes the challenge sent to the client.
Can be used as a form of document signing method.

Closes #353
@Daedaluz Daedaluz requested a review from a team as a code owner December 22, 2024 19:13
Copy link

coderabbitai bot commented Dec 22, 2024

Walkthrough

The pull request introduces a new WithChallenge login option in the WebAuthn login process, allowing users to provide a custom challenge during authentication. The changes modify the challenge generation logic in the BeginLogin method, enforcing a minimum challenge length of 16 bytes and providing more flexible challenge management. The implementation ensures that challenges can be either automatically generated or explicitly provided by the user, with enhanced validation and error handling.

Changes

File Change Summary
webauthn/login.go - Added WithChallenge(challenge []byte) LoginOption function
- Modified BeginLogin method to validate challenge length
- Refined challenge generation logic in beginLogin method
webauthn/login_test.go - Added test cases for WithChallenge option
- Included expectedChallenge field in test case struct
- Added validation for challenge length and presence

Assessment against linked issues

Objective Addressed Explanation
Implement WithChallenge(challenge []byte) option [#353]
Support custom challenge generation
Minimum challenge length validation

Poem

🐰 A rabbit's tale of WebAuthn delight,
Challenges now dance with user's might!
Sixteen bytes or more, the key to trust,
Custom challenges? Yes, we must!
Security hops with playful glee 🔐

Tip

CodeRabbit's docstrings feature is now available as part of our Early Access Program! Simply use the command @coderabbitai generate docstrings to have CodeRabbit automatically generate docstrings for your pull request. We would love to hear your feedback on Discord.


Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

❤️ Share
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR. (Beta)
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

Copy link

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
webauthn/login.go (1)

174-185: Consider early length validation in WithChallenge.
While the 16-byte minimum length check is handled in beginLogin, you might also validate it here to provide immediate user feedback and possibly reduce error-handling overhead downstream.

 func WithChallenge(challenge []byte) LoginOption {
+   if len(challenge) < 16 {
+       panic("challenge must be at least 16 bytes") // or return an error-based option
+   }
    return func(cco *protocol.PublicKeyCredentialRequestOptions) {
        cco.Challenge = challenge
    }
}
🧰 Tools
🪛 golangci-lint (1.62.2)

177-177: File is not goimports-ed with -local github.com/go-webauthn/webauthn

(goimports)

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 339114c and e309b41.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)
  • webauthn/login.go (3 hunks)
  • webauthn/login_test.go (3 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 golangci-lint (1.62.2)
webauthn/login.go

177-177: File is not goimports-ed with -local github.com/go-webauthn/webauthn

(goimports)

🔇 Additional comments (7)
webauthn/login.go (3)

71-78: Good job on conditional challenge creation.
Generating a random challenge only when it is missing offers the necessary flexibility for user-provided challenges.


79-82: Appropriate minimum challenge length enforcement.
Enforcing 16 bytes is in line with recommended security practices for WebAuthn challenges.


99-99: Storing challenge in session as a string.
Serializing the challenge as a string allows it to be easily passed around, but verify any downstream usage that might require the raw bytes. Overall, this is acceptable for session data.

webauthn/login_test.go (4)

35-40: Extended test struct with expected challenge.
Introducing 'expectedChallenge' enhances test coverage and clarity, ensuring challenge values are verified precisely.


88-97: Testing error for short challenge.
Great addition: verifying that providing a challenge shorter than 16 bytes triggers an error ensures compliance with security requirements.


98-108: Valid challenge test.
Verifying that a valid 32-byte challenge is round-tripped correctly strengthens the correctness of the WithChallenge feature.


129-131: Challenge validation in test results.
Confirming the returned challenge matches 'expectedChallenge' ensures user-provided challenges are respected and preserved in the final response.

Copy link
Member

@james-d-elliott james-d-elliott left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@james-d-elliott james-d-elliott merged commit 3a57554 into go-webauthn:master Dec 22, 2024
6 checks passed
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.

A WithChallenge option
2 participants