Closed petrkalivoda closed 7 years ago
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #16 +/- ##
===========================================
- Coverage 40.95% 39.85% -1.1%
Complexity 84 84
===========================================
Files 33 36 +3
Lines 547 562 +15
Branches 36 36
===========================================
Hits 224 224
- Misses 311 326 +15
Partials 12 12
Impacted Files | Coverage Δ | Complexity Δ | |
---|---|---|---|
...rak/eet/client/security/WSS4JEetInInterceptor.java | 0% <ø> (ø) |
0 <ø> (?) |
|
...ak/eet/client/security/WSS4JEetOutInterceptor.java | 0% <ø> (ø) |
0 <ø> (?) |
|
...eet/client/security/SignatureFaultInterceptor.java | 0% <ø> (ø) |
0 <ø> (?) |
|
...ak/eet/client/security/SecureEETCommunication.java | 0% <ø> (ø) |
0 <ø> (ø) |
:x: |
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact)
,ø = not affected
,? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 14081cd...0656e3a. Read the comment docs.
Hi @petrkalivoda, Thanks for your contribution! This looks awesome! I just added a test to verify also the exception path and handling and everything works perfectly.
Best regards, Tomas
Glad to help 👍
I have figured out a way to properly validate signature on EET messages using Exchange object to communicate between interceptors. This way the signature gets validated in compliance to table in signing.png without any "giant and unsecure" hacks.