Added note about function modifying its input #77
Conversation
Summary of ChangesHello @sergey3bv, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed! This pull request improves the clarity and safety of cryptographic functions by adding explicit documentation about their side effects. Specifically, it warns users that Highlights
🧠 New Feature in Public Preview: You can now enable Memory to help Gemini Code Assist learn from your team's feedback. This makes future code reviews more consistent and personalized to your project's style. Click here to enable Memory in your admin console. Using Gemini Code AssistThe full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips. Invoking Gemini You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either
Customization To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a Limitations & Feedback Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here. You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension. Footnotes
|
![gemini-code-assist[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/956858?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code Review
This pull request adds warnings to chacha20polyEncrypt and chacha20polyDecrypt to indicate that they modify their input arguments. While documenting this side effect is a good step, my review suggests a more robust solution: refactoring these functions to be side-effect-free by allocating new memory for the output instead of modifying the input slices in-place. This change would improve code safety and maintainability by preventing potential bugs related to unexpected argument modification.
| // key and uses it to encrypt the passed message. This uses an all-zero nonce as | ||
| // required by the route-blinding spec. | ||
| // | ||
| // Warning: the function modifies plainTxt |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
While adding a warning about modifying the input is helpful, a better approach would be to refactor the function to avoid this side effect altogether. Functions that modify their input arguments can be a source of subtle bugs if callers are not careful.
You can prevent plainTxt from being modified by passing nil as the destination buffer to aead.Seal. This will cause it to allocate a new slice for the ciphertext.
With this change, the warning comment is no longer needed.
Example:
func chacha20polyEncrypt(key, plainTxt []byte) ([]byte, error) {
aead, err := chacha20poly1305.New(key)
if err != nil {
return nil, err
}
return aead.Seal(nil, chaChaPolyZeroNonce[:], plainTxt, nil),
nil
}| // key and uses it to decrypt the passed cipher text. This uses an all-zero | ||
| // nonce as required by the route-blinding spec. | ||
| // | ||
| // Warning: the function modifies cipherTxt |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Similar to chacha20polyEncrypt, it would be more robust to change this function to not modify its input cipherTxt. This can be done by passing nil as the destination buffer to aead.Open. This avoids potential bugs and makes the function's behavior clearer.
With this change, the warning comment can be removed.
Example:
func chacha20polyDecrypt(key, cipherTxt []byte) ([]byte, error) {
aead, err := chacha20poly1305.New(key)
if err != nil {
return nil, err
}
return aead.Open(nil, chaChaPolyZeroNonce[:], cipherTxt, nil)
}
|
@sergey3bv, remember to re-request review from reviewers when ready |
2 participants
@Roasbeef
@gijswijs
Addressing #73