#httpsig

3 posts · Last used Jul 29

<p><a href="http://httpsig.org/" rel="nofollow ugc">httpsig.org</a> is a site with one sole purpose, to advocate for the adoption of <a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9421.html" rel="nofollow ugc">RFC 9421 HTTP Signatures</a>. It has a "Libraries" tab that does exactly what it advertises, it lists a bunch of libraries for you to use so you don't have to roll your own.</p> <p>If you want to integrate AP today, but you don't want to roll your own everything, where do you go? Who do you ask?</p> <p>All I know is:</p> <ul> <li><a href="https://fedify.dev/" rel="nofollow ugc">Fedify</a> → Typescript (thanks <a href="https://hollo.social/@hongminhee">@<bdi>hongminhee@hollo.social</bdi></a>!)</li> <li><a href="https://github.com/go-ap/fedbox" rel="nofollow ugc">FedBOX</a> → Go (thanks <a href="https://metalhead.club/@mariusor">@<bdi>mariusor@metalhead.club</bdi></a>!)[...]</li></ul>
0
12
0
0
I've started working on generating RFC9421 compatible HTTP-Signatures in #GoActivityPub about a week and a half ago, but it felt more like a month. Writing tests for the client module took the bulk of this time and it was a proper slog. We did manage to increase code coverage from under 20% to 80% plus. This makes it a bit harder to migrate to a new API when the future version 1 of the library will be tagged, but the changes I have planned shouldn't be insurmountable. Now I just need to implement the verification, and I'll be done with what is a very large milestone for the library. :goose_hacker:#ActivityPubDev #fedidev #httpsig
7
5
1
0
You've seen all posts