Skip to content

an archive timestamp added by a co-signer is recorded, and answers 200 - #2

Merged
unknovs merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
develop
Sep 4, 2026
Merged

an archive timestamp added by a co-signer is recorded, and answers 200#2
unknovs merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
develop

Conversation

@unknovs

@unknovs unknovs commented Sep 4, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

No description provided.

… manifest

Two fixes measured on the first release run. A release published right after a merge races the branch build, so the job now waits for ci to publish the image (up to 20 minutes) before tagging. And the retag is a plain pull/tag/push: imagetools create wraps a single manifest into a new manifest list, which gives the version tag a different, unsigned digest — re-pushing the same manifest keeps the digest, so the cosign signature keeps matching.

Signed-off-by: GatisB <l22exc@gmail.com>
POST /api/v1/documents/{id}/archived replaced the signed head and then recorded preservation_class through a second, owner-scoped step. Any other party on the chain's access list, a co-signer adding the archive timestamp to the document they signed, had the bytes replaced and then received 404 err:document:notFound; every retry stamped the container again and the row never showed the document as preserved. The class now rides in the same replace_container_blob call (ReplaceContainerArchived), so a refused fact leaves the document untouched and a swapped document is always recorded as archive-timestamped. SetPreservationClass is removed from the service, the store interface, the Postgres adapter and the in-memory double. New route test: a co-signer on the access list adds the archive timestamp and both parties read preservationClass = preservation. Requires the platform database with the widened procedure; response shape unchanged (CHANGELOG v0.1.1).

Signed-off-by: GatisB <l22exc@gmail.com>
@github-advanced-security

Copy link
Copy Markdown

You are seeing this message because GitHub Code Scanning has recently been set up for this repository, or this pull request contains the workflow file for the Code Scanning tool.

What Enabling Code Scanning Means:

  • The 'Security' tab will display more code scanning analysis results (e.g., for the default branch).
  • Depending on your configuration and choice of analysis tool, future pull requests will be annotated with code scanning analysis results.
  • You will be able to see the analysis results for the pull request's branch on this overview once the scans have completed and the checks have passed.

For more information about GitHub Code Scanning, check out the documentation.

@unknovs
unknovs merged commit fbbb90e into main Sep 4, 2026
9 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants