lnrpc+rpcserver: improve docs for CheckMacaroonPermissions #10030
Conversation
![gemini-code-assist[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/956858?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Summary of Changes
Hello @guggero, 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 primarily focuses on improving the clarity and comprehensiveness of the documentation for the CheckMacaroonPermissions RPC. It updates the descriptions for the RPC method itself and its request parameters across various interface definition files and generated code, ensuring that users and developers have a more precise understanding of its functionality and expected inputs.
Highlights
- Documentation Improvement: Enhanced the clarity and detail of documentation for the
CheckMacaroonPermissionsRPC and its request fields (macaroon,permissions,fullMethod). - API Clarity: Updated the RPC method's summary and individual field descriptions across
.proto, generated Go files, and Swagger definitions to provide a more precise understanding of its functionality, especially regarding macaroon validation and permission checking.
Using Gemini Code Assist
The 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 in your pull request via creating an issue comment (i.e. comment on the pull request page) using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands.
| Feature | Command | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Code Review | /gemini review |
Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state. |
| Pull Request Summary | /gemini summary |
Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state. |
| Comment | @gemini-code-assist | Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in issue comments and review comments. |
| Help | /gemini help |
Displays a list of available commands. |
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 .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.
Limitations & Feedback
Gemini Code Assist is currently in preview and 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 to provide feedback.
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
-
Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code Review
This pull request improves the documentation for the CheckMacaroonPermissions RPC and its related messages. The changes are generally good and make the API easier to understand. I've suggested a couple of wording improvements in the comments of the CheckMacPermRequest message in lnrpc/lightning.proto to further improve clarity and correctness regarding the macaroon and fullMethod fields.
| // The macaroon to check permissions for, serialized in binary format. For | ||
| // a macaroon to be valid, it must have been issued by lnd, must succeed all | ||
| // caveat conditions, and must contain all of the permissions specified in | ||
| // the permissions field. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This comment describes the properties of a valid macaroon, but the last clause, "and must contain all of the permissions specified in the permissions field", describes the purpose of the entire RPC call rather than just the macaroon field. To improve clarity, I suggest rephrasing this to focus only on the properties of a valid macaroon itself.
| // The macaroon to check permissions for, serialized in binary format. For | |
| // a macaroon to be valid, it must have been issued by lnd, must succeed all | |
| // caveat conditions, and must contain all of the permissions specified in | |
| // the permissions field. | |
| // The macaroon to check permissions for, serialized in binary format. For | |
| // the macaroon to be considered valid, it must have been issued by lnd and | |
| // must satisfy all its caveat conditions. |
| // The RPC method to check the macaroon against. This is only used if there | ||
| // are custom `uri:<rpcpackage>.<ServiceName>/<MethodName>` permissions in | ||
| // the permission list above. To check a macaroon against the list of | ||
| // permissions of a certain RPC method, query the `ListPermissions` RPC | ||
| // first, extract the permissions for the method, and then pass them in the | ||
| // `permissions` field above. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The current explanation for fullMethod is a bit misleading. The implementation in rpcserver.go shows that fullMethod is used as a fallback check if the main permission check fails, not just when uri permissions are in the list. The suggested workflow also makes this field seem redundant.
To make it clearer for users, I suggest updating the comment to accurately describe its behavior and how it can be used.
| // The RPC method to check the macaroon against. This is only used if there | |
| // are custom `uri:<rpcpackage>.<ServiceName>/<MethodName>` permissions in | |
| // the permission list above. To check a macaroon against the list of | |
| // permissions of a certain RPC method, query the `ListPermissions` RPC | |
| // first, extract the permissions for the method, and then pass them in the | |
| // `permissions` field above. | |
| // The RPC method to check the macaroon against. This is used as a fallback | |
| // if the permissions provided in the `permissions` field are not sufficient. | |
| // To check a macaroon against the permissions of a certain RPC method, you | |
| // can either provide the method's full URI in this field, or query the | |
| // `ListPermissions` RPC, extract the permissions for the method, and then | |
| // pass them in the `permissions` field above. |
| // the permission list above. To check a macaroon against the list of | ||
| // permissions of a certain RPC method, query the `ListPermissions` RPC | ||
| // first, extract the permissions for the method, and then pass them in the | ||
| // `permissions` field above. | ||
| string fullMethod = 3; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not sure why this is needed, can't it be done by specifying entity: uri and action: fullMethod in permissions?
| @@ -5099,8 +5100,24 @@ message Op { | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| message CheckMacPermRequest { | |||
| // The macaroon to check permissions for, serialized in binary format. For | |||
Fixes #10026.