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

fix(login): When searching for user credentials, terminate the loop i… #331

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

ws1031
Copy link

@ws1031 ws1031 commented Nov 18, 2024

fix(login): When searching for user credentials, terminate the loop immediately once valid credentials are found.

…mmediately once valid credentials are found.
@ws1031 ws1031 requested a review from a team as a code owner November 18, 2024 10:03
Copy link

coderabbitai bot commented Nov 18, 2024

Walkthrough

The changes involve a modification to the validateLogin method within the WebAuthn struct in the webauthn/login.go file. A new conditional check has been introduced to improve the efficiency of credential validation by breaking out of the inner loop once a matching credential is found. The error handling remains unchanged, ensuring that appropriate errors are returned if the user does not own all credentials from the allowed list. The overall structure and logic of the method are preserved.

Changes

File Change Summary
webauthn/login.go Modified validateLogin method to add a conditional check that breaks the loop upon finding a matching credential. Error handling remains consistent.

Poem

In the meadow where bunnies play,
A login's swift, no time to stray.
With checks so keen, they hop and bound,
Finding matches, safe and sound.
Credentials verified, all in a line,
Efficiency blooms, oh how divine! 🐇✨


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 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: 1

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 57b45b6 and 93c077c.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • webauthn/login.go (1 hunks)

Comment on lines +260 to +262
if credentialsOwned {
break
}
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

⚠️ Potential issue

Critical: Break statement is in the wrong loop scope

The current implementation breaks from the inner loop when a credential is found, but this could lead to incomplete validation. The code needs to verify that the user owns ALL credentials from the allowed list, not just one of them.

Here's the corrected implementation:

 for _, allowedCredentialID := range session.AllowedCredentialIDs {
     for _, credential = range credentials {
         if bytes.Equal(credential.ID, allowedCredentialID) {
             credentialsOwned = true
             break
         }
         credentialsOwned = false
     }
-    if credentialsOwned {
-        break
-    }
+    if !credentialsOwned {
+        return nil, protocol.ErrBadRequest.WithDetails("User does not own all credentials from the allowedCredentialList")
+    }
 }

-if !credentialsOwned {
-    return nil, protocol.ErrBadRequest.WithDetails("User does not own all credentials from the allowedCredentialList")
-}

This change:

  1. Continues to verify all allowed credentials
  2. Fails fast if any credential is not owned by the user
  3. Maintains the security requirement that the user must own ALL credentials in the allowed list

Committable suggestion skipped: line range outside the PR's diff.

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.

1 participant