Skip to content

Clarify a security consideration and link to Section 1.2 of RFC 8949 #104

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
fxamacker merged 1 commit into from
Mar 31, 2025
Merged

Clarify a security consideration and link to Section 1.2 of RFC 8949 #104

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion ccf_specs.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -262,7 +262,7 @@ CBOR security considerations in [Section 10](https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8

There are two types of checks for acceptable data: well-formedness and validity.

CCF decoders MUST detect and reject malformed data before checking for validity. [Appendix F](https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8949.html#name-well-formedness-errors-and-) of RFC 8949 defines well-formedness of encoded CBOR data.
CCF decoders MUST detect and reject malformed data items before checking for validity. [Section 1.2](https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8949.html#section-1.2) of RFC 8949 defines "well-formed" data items.

CCF decoders SHOULD detect and reject malformed data before creating Cadence objects and without requiring Cadence type information.

Expand Down