fix: handling content-serve delegations #189
Merged
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
fforbeck
force-pushed
the
feat/gateway-auth-migration
branch
from
0d033c5 to
1b798f4
Compare
- use the full signer + did:web as the authority for the server - do not fail when multiple delegations are stored by content/serve - pass blocks with each stored delegation when serving - allow alternate authority on content serve delegations # Why - The first issue we're having is attestations must match the authority, and we were using the signer, as opposed to the identity, so the dids did not match - Second, we didn't support storing multiple delegations, which is problematic cause the `claim` check in the implementation of access/delegate will fail if you don't also give it the attestation - Third, we were not passing in attached blocks with the our delegations - Finally, it's never come up before, but who exactly is the "authority" on a storing of space/content/serve? Here, my belief is it should be the upload-service, as it's the ultimate arbiter of whether egress can be billed. I don't know if the upload service is properly checking each submitted content serve for validity, but if it is, its authority will be itself. So I added facilities to use the upload service as the authority -- of note, the authority does NOT require a private key, so don't worry we're just storing the upload service pub key in wrangler.toml
fforbeck
force-pushed
the
feat/gateway-auth-migration
branch
from
3e71792 to
97236b4
Compare
travis
approved these changes
Dec 8, 2025
Member
travis
left a comment
travis
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
some fairly aesthetic changes, though removing unnecessary logs and comments are both relatively important - approving since they are easy to change now or later
hannahhoward
approved these changes
Dec 9, 2025
Member
hannahhoward
left a comment
hannahhoward
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM -- suggestions are non blocking. you should remove CONTENT_SERVE_AUTHORITY_PUB_KEY I think though.
fforbeck
force-pushed
the
feat/gateway-auth-migration
branch
from
fa33344 to
8601eb8
Compare
fforbeck
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 11, 2025
🤖 I have created a release *beep* *boop* --- ## [2.36.1](v2.36.0...v2.36.1) (2025-12-09) ### Bug Fixes * handling content-serve delegations ([#189](#189)) ([21491b4](21491b4)) --- This PR was generated with [Release Please](https://github.com/googleapis/release-please). See [documentation](https://github.com/googleapis/release-please#release-please). Co-authored-by: github-actions[bot] <41898282+github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
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.
Added Validator Proof to be able to validate attestations issued by the upload service when clients attempt to store
content/servedelegations.Related to storacha/project-tracking#592