[PM-39454] feat(km): record the user key id on key-establishing flows - #8110
Draft
quexten wants to merge 2 commits into
Draft
[PM-39454] feat(km): record the user key id on key-establishing flows#8110quexten wants to merge 2 commits into
quexten wants to merge 2 commits into
Conversation
Codecov Report❌ Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## km/user-key-id-04-repository-methods #8110 +/- ##
========================================================================
- Coverage 67.38% 62.90% -4.49%
========================================================================
Files 2303 2304 +1
Lines 100349 100400 +51
Branches 9034 9041 +7
========================================================================
- Hits 67622 63152 -4470
- Misses 30445 35062 +4617
+ Partials 2282 2186 -96 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
quexten
force-pushed
the
km/user-key-id-05-write-path
branch
from
July 31, 2026 13:33
cd4e688 to
4c3dd87
Compare
quexten
force-pushed
the
km/user-key-id-05-write-path
branch
from
July 31, 2026 15:20
4c3dd87 to
86ae77d
Compare
quexten
added
ai-review
Contributor
|
Claude Code is reviewing this pull request... If this comment does not update with results, check the Actions log. |
![claude[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1236702?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
Lets clients report which user key they wrapped their unlock data under, on the flows that establish a user key: registration, setting or changing a master password, setting a Key Connector key, submitting account keys, and key rotation. The field is optional everywhere — a client that predates it sends nothing and the request stays valid. It is deliberately excluded from SetKeyConnectorKeyRequestModel.IsV2Request() for the same reason. UserKeyIdAttribute rejects a malformed value at the model-binding boundary so a bad string fails as a 400 rather than as an exception deeper in the flow. Rotation assigns the key id unconditionally: a rotation replaces the user key, so a client that supplies no key id leaves the server with none rather than one that names a key that no longer exists. The key ids are recorded but not yet checked against what the server has stored; that validation is the next commit.
quexten
force-pushed
the
km/user-key-id-05-write-path
branch
from
July 31, 2026 17:29
a22d272 to
dc7519e
Compare
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
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.
This PR plumbs through key ids on flows that set the key id.
should all gain the user key id and set it during the flow.
It also adds rejections for password changes and kdf changes that supply the wrong key id.