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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Ensure indirect runtime signed extra is correct #1768

Closed
serban300 opened this issue Jan 13, 2023 · 0 comments · Fixed by #1780
Closed

Ensure indirect runtime signed extra is correct #1768

serban300 opened this issue Jan 13, 2023 · 0 comments · Fixed by #1780
Assignees
@serban300

Comments

@serban300
Copy link
Collaborator

Related to #1748 but I think it's better to have a separate issue.

It would be nice if we could add an integrity test to check that the SignedExtension defined in the actual runtime is compatible with the one defined in the bridge's indirect runtime. We should check that AdditionalSigned and the constructor parameters are the same / compatible.
@serban300 serban300 self-assigned this Jan 13, 2023
@serban300 serban300 mentioned this issue Jan 18, 2023
Merged
svyatonik pushed a commit that referenced this issue Jul 17, 2023
@chevdor
GHA updates and pin (#1768)
220bc55 
* Pin checkout to v3.1.0 and update srtool-actions to v0.6.0

* Pin GHA ruby/setup-ruby to 1.118.0

* Update and pin GHA deps

* Pin all external GHA deps
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@serban300 serban300

Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

Add integrity check for signed extensions serban300/parity-bridges-common
1 participant
@serban300