-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 86
Lockbox.m : Updated to use the newer iOS 15 NSKeyedArchiver calls #67
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
Open
apple-ihack-geek
wants to merge
6
commits into
granoff:master
Choose a base branch
from
apple-ihack-geek:bk-update-api-calls
base: master
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
6 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
5d3ba3b
Lockbox.m : Updated to use the newer iOS 15 NSKeyedArchiver calls
apple-ihack-geek a085b2e
Should really pass the class, otherwise we get a runtime warning...
apple-ihack-geek 5b24144
Added original message signatures back in with deprecation warnings.
apple-ihack-geek fab66ac
switched to a true deprecation warning.
apple-ihack-geek d27bcfd
Added -/+(id)unarchiveObjectOfClasses to allow for more than one clas…
apple-ihack-geek 42bda48
improved maintainability
apple-ihack-geek File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
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.
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.
So it turns out that using
[NSObject class]is not a great idea. Xcode surfaces the following runtime issue while running the tests in the sample project:So basically, this circumvents secure coding best practices.
I need to think about whether accepting this pull request is a good idea with respect to the intended best practices of the newer APIs. You might consider a newer alternative library, Strongbox. It's a Swift implementation of Lockbox that relies on
NSSecureCodingprotocol conformance to ensure the new APIs can be used.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.
So using NSObject here is the equivalent of using the old [unarchiver decodeObjectForKey:key]; on old line 215 new line 223 that master branch is using at least form a security perspective. I suspect Apple, when they do disable their functionality, will do so at the same time. Personally I think this is better, because now the developer will get both a compile time and runtime warning that they need to upgrade, where as before it was only a compile time warning. If you want, we can make our compile time deprecation warning a little stronger.
But ultimately the decision is up to you.