feat: auth-client stores identities in indexeddb #605
Merged
+501
−74
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| version: number, | ||
| ) => { | ||
| // Clear legacy stored delegations | ||
| if (localStorage && localStorage.getItem(KEY_STORAGE_DELEGATION)) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If this changes the place where identities are stored, is there any migration of identities from the previous place to the new one? Or is there a reason why that would not be necessary?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Identities are temporary delegation identities, and get cleared on logout. Resetting after a package upgrade is a fairly safe interaction, and will only require a new II login
ericswanson-dfinity
approved these changes
Aug 4, 2022
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description
AuthClient now uses IndexedDb by default, as localStorage is less secure.
Also offers a generic Indexed Db keyval store, IdbKeyVal
I decided to leave out encryption for this PR to reduce overhead - could be added at a later date https://gist.github.com/krpeacock/9203f1c6bbd8c55f2eef5e001223edf2
Fixes SDK-313
How Has This Been Tested?
Unit test coverage
Checklist: