Closed brc-dd closed 10 months ago
Using crypto.webcrypto.getRandomValues() is recommended instead of directly using the aliased version from crypto.getRandomValues() as the latter is not meant to be compatible with the WebCrypto spec and is non-standard.
crypto.webcrypto.getRandomValues()
crypto.getRandomValues()
There was earlier discussion on this in the node repo - https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/41779, https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/41782, https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/41760
This is breaking some downstream tools as well that are bundling / down-compiling nanoid (although that's not much of an nanoid issue).
PS: updating the clean script as well. Running test was failing for new contributors who don't already have a coverage directory.
clean
test
Thanks. The fix was released in 5.0.2.
Using
crypto.webcrypto.getRandomValues()
is recommended instead of directly using the aliased version fromcrypto.getRandomValues()
as the latter is not meant to be compatible with the WebCrypto spec and is non-standard.There was earlier discussion on this in the node repo - https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/41779, https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/41782, https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/41760
This is breaking some downstream tools as well that are bundling / down-compiling nanoid (although that's not much of an nanoid issue).
PS: updating the
clean
script as well. Runningtest
was failing for new contributors who don't already have a coverage directory.