Implemented Key Sharing and Seperation Config id Feature for Singleton.#731
Implemented Key Sharing and Seperation Config id Feature for Singleton.#731karthikamurthy wants to merge 1 commit intohyperledger-archives:mainfrom
Conversation
karthikamurthy
requested review from
EugeneYYY,
Ram-srini,
SriharshaSubbakrishna,
TomBarnes,
danintel,
dcmiddle,
manju956,
manojgop,
pankajgoyal2 and
rranjan3
as code owners
|
This pull request introduces 1 alert when merging 4da1c5b into 235402f - view on LGTM.com new alerts:
|
karthikamurthy
force-pushed
the
kss_singleton
branch
from
4da1c5b to
b58aafc
Compare
|
This pull request introduces 1 alert when merging b58aafc into 235402f - view on LGTM.com new alerts:
|
karthikamurthy
force-pushed
the
kss_singleton
branch
from
b58aafc to
b068c59
Compare
|
This pull request introduces 1 alert when merging b068c59 into 235402f - view on LGTM.com new alerts:
|
karthikamurthy
force-pushed
the
kss_singleton
branch
from
b068c59 to
5f421ba
Compare
|
This pull request introduces 1 alert when merging 5f421ba into 235402f - view on LGTM.com new alerts:
|
karthikamurthy
force-pushed
the
kss_singleton
branch
from
5f421ba to
8962aaa
Compare
|
This pull request introduces 4 alerts when merging 8962aaa into 235402f - view on LGTM.com new alerts:
|
karthikamurthy
force-pushed
the
kss_singleton
branch
from
8962aaa to
fed2b31
Compare
|
This pull request introduces 2 alerts when merging fed2b31 into 235402f - view on LGTM.com new alerts:
|
| if not self._epid_enclave_info: | ||
| self._epid_enclave_info = self.enclave_info.EpidEnclaveInfo( | ||
| if self._config.get("kss_config") is not None: | ||
| logger.info("KSS Config: " + self._config.get("kss_config")) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is it ok to display kss_config in log?
|
|
||
|
|
||
| class KeyManagementEnclaveInfo(BaseEnclaveInfo): | ||
| class KeyManagementEnclaveInfo(enclave_info.BaseEnclaveInfo): |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Commit message says config id feature for singleton but KME is also touched. Change commit message accordingly.
|
|
||
| # ------------------------------------------------------- | ||
| def __init__(self, config, worker_id, enlcave_type): | ||
| def __init__(self, config, worker_id): |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
is there any reason why enclave_type is removed?
|
|
||
| # Part of what is returned with the signup data is an enclave quote, we | ||
| # want to update the revocation list first. | ||
| self._update_sig_rl() |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this function is specific epid attestation and it is moved to epid file , usage should go that file
| // First attempt to load the enclave executable | ||
| sgx_status_t ret = SGX_SUCCESS; | ||
| ret = tcf::sgx_util::CallSgx([this, flags, &token] () { | ||
| if(this->_kss_config[0] == NULL){ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
why are we checking only index 0, is that sufficient?
|
|
||
| } else { | ||
| tcf::Log(TCF_LOG_INFO, "Enclave::sgx_create_enclave_ex called" ); | ||
| void *enclave_ex_p[32] = { 0 }; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
use constant instead of hard coded value 32, may be sgx sdk or create one.
Signed-off-by: Karthika Murthy <karthika.murthy@intel.com>
2 participants
Signed-off-by: Karthika Murthy karthika.murthy@intel.com