Repository navigation
Conversation
|
@codex review |
Codex Review SummaryThis comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHubYour team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings. |
![chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1144995?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: a80dc1dad4
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
| jwtSigner: clientMetadata?.authorization_signed_response_alg | ||
| ? { method: "jwk", publicJwk: decoded.holderKey, alg: this.cryptography.algorithm(decoded.holderKey) } | ||
| : undefined, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
When a direct_post.jwt request specifies authorization_signed_response_alg, this always signs with the credential's holder key and its algorithm rather than the requested algorithm. For example, an ES256-bound credential presented to a verifier requesting EdDSA (or an EdDSA-bound credential with an ES256 verifier) cannot produce the requested JARM response, even though the wallet advertises support for both algorithms below. Select or generate a signing key matching authorization_signed_response_alg, or reject unsupported algorithms before response construction.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
Readiness checklist