fix(beginLogin): custom challenge take effect

[fanhousanbu]

Customer Challenge in LoginOption won't take effect due to session ignore this field

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

The changes involve modifications to the beginLogin function in the WebAuthn struct, specifically how the Challenge field in the SessionData struct is populated. Additionally, a new test function, TestCustomerChallenge, has been added to enhance test coverage for handling customer and non-customer challenges during the login process.

Changes

Files	Change Summary
webauthn/login.go	Modified beginLogin function to update the source of the Challenge field in SessionData.
webauthn/login_test.go	Added TestCustomerChallenge to validate customer and non-customer challenges in the login process.

Poem

🐰 In the meadow where challenges roam,
A login dance finds its home.
With tests for all, both near and far,
We hop along, a shining star!
Each challenge met, with joy we sing,
For every change, a new spring brings! 🌼

---

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

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

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>.
  • 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 generate interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table.
  • @coderabbitai show all the console.log statements in this repository.
  • @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 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.

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 0

Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between de6e27a and b459556.

Files selected for processing (2)

• webauthn/login.go (1 hunks)
• webauthn/login_test.go (1 hunks)

Additional comments not posted (2)

webauthn/login_test.go (1)

112-177: LGTM!

The new test function TestCustomerChallenge is well-structured and comprehensive. It covers both customer and non-customer challenge scenarios, and validates the expected outcomes. The test cases are clearly defined using a struct, making it easy to understand and maintain. The test follows the best practices of table-driven testing in Go.

webauthn/login.go (1)

93-93: LGTM!

The change to populate the Challenge field of the SessionData struct using assertion.Response.Challenge.String() instead of challenge.String() is a good refinement. It suggests a more direct integration with the response from an authentication assertion, potentially enhancing the accuracy or relevance of the challenge used in the login process. The overall structure and flow of the function remain intact, but the logic for setting the Challenge has been refined to align with the assertion response.

[james-d-elliott]

What's the use case for setting a custom challenge?

[fanhousanbu]

What's the use case for setting a custom challenge?

For enhancement passkey signature ability, for example, my biz logic data could be signed by passkey if I wrap it into custom challenge

[james-d-elliott]

Is there any related specification documentation or is this purely a custom out of scope implementation? Usually the authenticator is signing the challenge, not the RP. What verification process exists on the authenticator to verify the signature?

[fanhousanbu]

Is there any related specification documentation or is this purely a custom out of scope implementation? Usually the authenticator is signing the challenge, not the RP. What verification process exists on the authenticator to verify the signature?

I dont' think there is any related specification documents.

For my case,

In RP, I can specify a signature alg like "-7", and I have the publice key, so the RP could verification if the signature available. If the signature is calculated from some custom data, I can post custom data with signature to other servers without cheated