fix keymanager: use ed25519 for to sign manifest

[kbushgit]

Signed-off-by: Kostiantyn Bushko kbushko@intellias.com

[pattivacek]

Looks fine, but can we have a unit test that exercises this for both key algorithms?

[kbushgit]

Looks fine, but can we have a unit test that exercises this for both key algorithms?

Yes sure, but it still not clear for me how the different methods are processed on the BE, so far we have only one definition for the RSA algorithm rsassa-pss , it's not related to the ed25519 but anyway...

[mike-sul]

Perhaps it makes sense to add some low-level test(s) verifying if a signature method is set to an expected value and a signature actually matches the specified method (e.g. signature["method"] is set to rsassa-pss while it was actually signed by different method)

[codecov-io]

Codecov Report

Merging #1608 into master will increase coverage by 0.01%.
The diff coverage is 77.77%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #1608      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   82.68%   82.69%   +0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         190      190              
  Lines       12079    12087       +8     
==========================================
+ Hits         9987     9995       +8     
  Misses       2092     2092              

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
src/libaktualizr/crypto/keymanager.cc	87.24% <77.77%> (-0.53%)	⬇️
src/libaktualizr/package_manager/ostreemanager.cc	79.04% <0.00%> (-0.74%)	⬇️
src/libaktualizr/storage/sqlstorage.cc	80.03% <0.00%> (-0.39%)	⬇️
src/libaktualizr/crypto/crypto.cc	83.78% <0.00%> (+0.67%)	⬆️
src/aktualizr_info/main.cc	92.34% <0.00%> (+0.85%)	⬆️
src/libaktualizr/storage/sqlstorage_base.cc	76.87% <0.00%> (+1.36%)	⬆️
src/libaktualizr/storage/sql_utils.h	85.71% <0.00%> (+2.59%)	⬆️

---

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 9b0ce21...fe1fec5. Read the comment docs.

[pattivacek]

This looks fine. How does the BE react to the manifest?

[kbushgit]

This looks fine. How does the BE react to the manifest?

Without this fix, the server response with the following error

response: {"code":"signature_not_valid","description":"The given signature is not valid","cause":null,"errorId":"5cc595df-2e8e-4ed0-83f2-9b76e3309666"}
Put manifest request failed: 0  HTTP 400

[pattivacek]

Cool, thanks!