Skip to content
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

Backport custody improvements #4355

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
May 8, 2024

Conversation

hdevalence
Copy link
Member

Describe your changes

Backports the following to 0.73.x:

Issue ticket number and link

#4345

Checklist before requesting a review

  • If this code contains consensus-breaking changes, I have added the "consensus-breaking" label. Otherwise, I declare my belief that there are not consensus-breaking changes, for the following reason:

    only pcli custody changes

cronokirby and others added 2 commits May 8, 2024 10:05
This adds a new option to encrypt the `soft-kms` and `threshold` custody
backends with a password, so that spend-key related material is
encrypted at rest. This is implemented by:

1. Having a `pcli init --encrypted` flag that applies to both of these
backends, which prompts a user for a password (and confirmation) before
using that to encrypt the config.
2. Having a `pcli init re-encrypt` command to read an existing config
and encrypt its backend, if necessary, to allow importing existing
configs.

This is also implemented internally in a lazy way, so that a password is
only prompted when the custody services methods are actually called,
allowing us to not need a password for view only commands.

Closes #4293.

- [x] If this code contains consensus-breaking changes, I have added the
"consensus-breaking" label. Otherwise, I declare my belief that there
are not consensus-breaking changes, for the following reason:

  > This is a client-only change.

---------

Co-authored-by: cratelyn <[email protected]>
## Describe your changes

Improves UX for the DKG ceremony based on user feedback, so we can
actually tell people to use it.

This is a PR on top of #4343 to make it as easy as possible to merge.

## Issue ticket number and link

#4335

## Checklist before requesting a review

- [x] If this code contains consensus-breaking changes, I have added the
"consensus-breaking" label. Otherwise, I declare my belief that there
are not consensus-breaking changes, for the following reason:

  > client-side key generation logic only
@conorsch conorsch mentioned this pull request May 8, 2024
7 tasks
@conorsch conorsch self-requested a review May 8, 2024 17:18
@conorsch conorsch merged commit 80105be into release/v0.73.x May 8, 2024
10 checks passed
@conorsch conorsch deleted the backport-custody-improvements branch May 8, 2024 17:43
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
Status: Done
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants