revocation_response is optional
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Python
- Stars
- 115
- Forks
- 34
- PR merge metrics
- No merged PRs in 30d
Description
According to rfc6960 (https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6960#section-4.2.1) the revocation reason is optional. Perhaps I have misunderstood some part of the spec, but as far as I can see (and have found in my own tests), the line 1101 in validate.py (https://github.com/wbond/certvalidator/blob/b69d3b745b5af9e5ccd4b9781407ab7e82076d6b/certvalidator/validate.py#L1101) does not first check that the revocation_info['revocation_reason'] is not Void before attempting to use the human_friendly property.
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start in validate.py at line 1101 and compare the handling of revocation_info['revocation_reason'] with RFC 6960 section 4.2.1. Reproduce the reported case where the revocation reason is absent, then add regression coverage showing that certificate validation handles this response correctly.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- python
- Domain
- security
- Issue type
- Bug
- Difficulty
- 2/5
- Estimated time
- 1-3 hours
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Clearly specified
- Newbie friendliness
- 35/100