CCID: Remove touch received info output #51
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
The current way is not valid, as the output is only for wait extensions, and not for touch information. There's also no way to distinguish an error from a correct touch received from the CCID layer. It's better to remove this display
daringer
approved these changes
Dec 13, 2024
robin-nitrokey
approved these changes
Dec 13, 2024
tlaurion
added a commit
to tlaurion/heads
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 13, 2024
…otp-verification#51 I give up trying to make Nitrokey do the right thing. They will propose PR to Heads next to fix their own fixes for their own caused regressions and security vulns. I just stopped caring for sanity reasons, i'm making quiet+eom/user-reownership fixes for feature freeze. If nitrokey pays, there is gonna be future collaboration, if they don't, they will do Heads related stuff themselves. Signed-off-by: Thierry Laurion <[email protected]>
sosthene-nitrokey
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 17, 2024
This comment was marked as duplicate.
This comment was marked as duplicate.
|
No more changes under Heads on my side to point with ever moving commits not under 1.7 released version bump. As stated, this touch thing was under engineered. Waiting for PR under Heads side from Nitrokey side since unpaid, and also removal of physical presence altogether which creates a bunch of unpaid regression validation, changes needed under heads which Nitrokey are not contributing changes for resulting in unpaid work on my side which stops here. Please remove physical presence requirements from firmware version bump #41 Note that this is not tested under linuxboot/heads#1866 |
tlaurion
added a commit
to tlaurion/heads
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 21, 2024
…otp-verification#51 I give up trying to make Nitrokey do the right thing. They will propose PR to Heads next to fix their own fixes for their own caused regressions and security vulns. I just stopped caring for sanity reasons, i'm making quiet+eom/user-reownership fixes for feature freeze. If nitrokey pays, there is gonna be future collaboration, if they don't, they will do Heads related stuff themselves. Signed-off-by: Thierry Laurion <[email protected]>
tlaurion
added a commit
to tlaurion/heads
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 21, 2024
…otp-verification#51 I give up trying to make Nitrokey do the right thing. They will propose PR to Heads next to fix their own fixes for their own caused regressions and security vulns. I just stopped caring for sanity reasons, i'm making quiet+eom/user-reownership fixes for feature freeze. If nitrokey pays, there is gonna be future collaboration, if they don't, they will do Heads related stuff themselves. Signed-off-by: Thierry Laurion <[email protected]>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
The current way is not valid, as the output is only for wait extensions, and not for touch information.
There's also no way to distinguish an error from a correct touch received from the CCID layer.
It's better to remove this display
Fix #50