-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 316
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
feat: checksum extension #347
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
Thank you very much for this PR! It looks interesting. Let me know once it is ready for a review! |
Sorry this took so long. Need some help with code reviews and testing this |
Thank you! I will try to review this in the next two weeks! |
partially copied from tus#347
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thank you again for this incredible work. I left some comments to your code :)
lib/upload.js
Outdated
Checksum = require('./browser/extensions/checksum').default | ||
} | ||
this._checksum = new Checksum( | ||
Checksum.supportedAlogrithms.find((supportedAlgo) => supportedAlgorithms.includes(supportedAlgo)), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
What does this check do? The combination of find and includes looks suspicious.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I was trying to fetch the supported algorithms from the server and see if one of them matches one of the supported algorithms on the client. If we're saying client and server have agreed upon an algorithm from the get go, then we can skip this OPTIONS call and let client just configure the algorithm in options.
lib/upload.js
Outdated
if (value === null) { | ||
if (this.options.enableChecksum) { | ||
if (this._checksum) { | ||
value.arrayBuffer().then((chunkBuffer) => { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Could this entire if block be merged with the last else block? They seem very similar and would avoid some duplication.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Not sure how this might reduce the duplication as one is async. I've removed one outer if condition. Is that okay?
Thank you for the review. Please have a look @Acconut, I see there are conflicts. I'll try to address them, might need help |
@Acconut please have another look at this |
Can I work on this? I may have a need to have this working in the future. |
Apologies, I wasn't aware that @manohar27 performed changes after my last review! @mahyarmirrashed Feel free to continue, but did you have anything specific in mind that needs to be changed here? |
@Acconut I have not taken a close look at the PR. Just wondering if there is a way that I can contribute/continue if needed. I might have a need for the checksum extension in about a month. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Again, thanks very much for the work and apologies for losing track of this! I left a few comments if you or anybody else is interested in continuing this. It's on a very good track and we just need a few adjustments to get this ready.
"forceAllTransforms": true | ||
} ] | ||
], | ||
"plugins": ["@babel/transform-runtime"] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Could you explain why this plugin is necessary?
@@ -66,6 +66,7 @@ function startUpload() { | |||
endpoint, | |||
chunkSize, | |||
retryDelays: [0, 1000, 3000, 5000], | |||
checksumAlgo: "SHA-256", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The tus protocol itself uses a naming conventional like sha1
, so I would prefer if we could also use sha256
here.
class Checksum { | ||
static supportedAlgorithms = ['SHA-1', 'SHA-256', 'SHA-384', 'SHA-512']; | ||
|
||
constructor (algo = 'SHA-256') { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't think we need a default value here. If no algorithm or an unsupported one is supplied, we can just error out.
@@ -129,3 +131,7 @@ export class DetailedError extends Error { | |||
originalResponse: HttpResponse | |||
causingError: Error | |||
} | |||
|
|||
export interface Checksum { | |||
getHexDigest(): string; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The Upload-Checksum
encodes the checksum in base64, instead of hexadecimal. So we need to adjust the interface itself as well as the implementations. I am also wondering if the checksum provider should just return a byte array and let the main tus-js-client logic take care of encoding it into the right format.
@@ -129,3 +131,7 @@ export class DetailedError extends Error { | |||
originalResponse: HttpResponse | |||
causingError: Error | |||
} | |||
|
|||
export interface Checksum { | |||
getHexDigest(): string; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The inferface definition is also missing the data
argument.
|
||
urlStorage?: UrlStorage | ||
fileReader?: FileReader | ||
httpStack?: HttpStack | ||
checksum?: Checksum; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I would prefer a name that aligns with fileReader
for the checksum as well. Maybe we can call this option checksumProvider
and the classes also ChecksumGenerator
.
"Digest" would also likely be a better fit than checksum, although the protocol specification does not use that term, unfortunately.
}) | ||
.catch((err) => { | ||
log(err) | ||
throw err |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
For error handling, please use _emitError.
@@ -787,4 +787,24 @@ describe('tus', () => { | |||
await assertUrlStorage(tus.defaultOptions.urlStorage) | |||
}) | |||
}) | |||
|
|||
describe('#Checksum', () => { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We would also need a full test to ensure the checksum header is added to the actual requests. Such a test should be placed in test-common
, which includes tests shared between browsers and Node.js.
Let me know if you need help with getting this running :)
@@ -129,3 +131,7 @@ export class DetailedError extends Error { | |||
originalResponse: HttpResponse | |||
causingError: Error | |||
} | |||
|
|||
export interface Checksum { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Once we have finalized the interface and options, we should also add documentation. But that can wait for now.
I'll try to do some work on this in the new year. By the way @Acconut , should there be any documentation changes with this? Something to let people know how to use this feature? |
Yes, once we have settled on how the feature's API should work, we can also address the documentation.
Great! I am looking forward to your contributions :) |
Adds Checksum Extension support.
This is work in progress.
Uses SubtleCrypto on browser and crypto library on nodejs