Skip to content

Conversation

@ctz
Copy link
Member

@ctz ctz commented Nov 25, 2025

fixes #418
addresses one item in #70

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 25, 2025

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 97.05%. Comparing base (12b6ffc) to head (ffe136b).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #419      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   97.04%   97.05%   +0.01%     
==========================================
  Files          20       20              
  Lines        4232     4247      +15     
==========================================
+ Hits         4107     4122      +15     
  Misses        125      125              

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

Copy link
Member

@djc djc left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Do we want to backport this to 0.103.x?

Copy link
Member

@cpu cpu left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Seems reasonable. The special-case V1 trust anchor parsing code path doesn't have matching skip logic in this diff, but the fields are spec'd to be present only in v2/v3 so that seems correct to me.

There's really no reason for anyone to be generating certs with these fields (and they're rare enough that x509-parser's support for recognizing them was broken for a good while without anyone complaining) but the 5280 SHOULD for relying parties to parse but ignore these seems reasonable to honor.

@cpu
Copy link
Member

cpu commented Nov 27, 2025

Do we want to backport this to 0.103.x?

I don't think it's important enough to justify the work personally.

@ctz ctz added this pull request to the merge queue Dec 2, 2025
Merged via the queue into main with commit f3fc946 Dec 2, 2025
40 checks passed
@ctz ctz deleted the jbp-skip-unique-ids branch December 2, 2025 18:05
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.

Parsers fails to parse certificates with issuerUniqueID and/or subjectUniqueID

4 participants