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

Multitenancy credential storage #3387

Closed
PatStLouis opened this issue Dec 9, 2024 · 5 comments · Fixed by #3391
Closed

Multitenancy credential storage #3387

PatStLouis opened this issue Dec 9, 2024 · 5 comments · Fixed by #3391
Assignees
Labels
bug Something isn't working High Priority

Comments

@PatStLouis
Copy link
Contributor

I noticed that when storing/querying credentials stored in a multi-tenant agent, the credentials are shared across sub wallets. I would like to understand why I get this behavior and how we can address this as this seems less than ideal.

@PatStLouis PatStLouis added bug Something isn't working High Priority labels Dec 9, 2024
@dbluhm
Copy link
Contributor

dbluhm commented Dec 9, 2024

Your original comment on Discord for context:

can someone validate for me if this is a bug or intended behavior? I have a multitenant agent. I create a subwallet, create a local did and store a VC. When I query the dids/VCs I see both of these resources. Then I create a new subwallet, create a local did and store a VC. When I query these resources I see the did I just create and both credentials. It seems like credentials are shared across all subwallets? Is that normal? Seems odd

What operation specifically are you referring to when you say "store a VC?"

@PatStLouis
Copy link
Contributor Author

I'm calling the /vc/credentials/store endpoint, which invokes the vcHolder:

async def store_credential(

@PatStLouis
Copy link
Contributor Author

PatStLouis commented Dec 9, 2024

This is similar to how the issue-credential-v2 ld_proof handler stores the credential:

@jamshale jamshale linked a pull request Dec 9, 2024 that will close this issue
@dbluhm
Copy link
Contributor

dbluhm commented Dec 10, 2024

This was introduced in #3010 and was included in 1.0.0 and onward; a backport was also committed to 0.11.x and 0.12.x 🤦‍♂️

@swcurran sorry 😬 this will mean a new LTS patch release for those releases

@swcurran
Copy link
Contributor

OK…that will be fun. I’d be tempted to not do 0.11.x since it’s LTS runs out in January 2025, but doing one or both does not make a big difference in effort.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working High Priority
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

4 participants