incubator-couchdb-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From J Chris Anderson <>
Subject Re: What are the contents of userCtx in validators ?
Date Sat, 21 Aug 2010 17:31:21 GMT

On Aug 21, 2010, at 12:45 AM, sgoto wrote:

> On Sat, Aug 21, 2010 at 12:43 AM, sgoto <> wrote:
>> as far as i can understand, validation functions can't change either,
>> unless all previous documents get reapplied the same validation function, or
>> else replication will create a non-backward compatible merging conflict to
>> be resolved.

yes, validation functions are not retroactive. furthermore, each user is in charge of her
own validation functions, so some intermediate nodes may choose not to validate.

>> the way i'm trying to solve this problem is having each database have one
>> immutable validation rule: each document needs to be signed by a
>> per-database-constant-public-key or by a PGP certificate signed by that
>> public key (1 level of transitive trust, alla web of trust).

why not just ensure that it is signed by any well-formed key? (in my model each user has a
key, and you might input a message on your localhost, that replicates via N hops, to eventually
reach my localhost, at which point I know the signature applies cleanly, so all I need to
do is decide if I trust the key).

>> does that make sense ?
> ah, one more question: does validation functions have access to the binary
> data of attachments ? how can i make sure that the attachments are also
> signed ?

no, attachments are not sent to the JS process. however, there is a ticket out, for including
the md5 checksum of the attachment as part of the attachment stub. in that case, the md5 hash
could be signed as well.

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message