Added Aggregator::is_agg_param_valid method
#1139
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…d method in the spec
divergentdave
requested changes
Nov 13, 2024
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We have some unit tests in the proof of concept implementation here: https://github.com/cfrg/draft-irtf-cfrg-vdaf/blob/a4874547794818573acd8734874c9784043b1140/poc/tests/test_vdaf_poplar1.py#L187
The most important case to test is that you can't aggregate the same level of the tree twice, since that would double-dip the Beaver multiplication triple generated by the client.
|
Alright, should be ready for another pass |
divergentdave
approved these changes
Nov 14, 2024
Co-authored-by: David Cook <[email protected]>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Copied the method verbatim from here, which is effectively unchanged from draft-09.
One point: this doesn't have any unit tests. I've read and re-read the draft and I still don't quite understand what this is supposed to be testing. A unit test that tests the error case we care about would be much appreciated.