Skip to content

feat: implement new keypackage api [WPB-19574] #1598

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

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 57 commits into from
Dec 1, 2025
Merged

feat: implement new keypackage api [WPB-19574] #1598

merged 57 commits into from
Dec 1, 2025

Conversation

@coriolinus
Copy link
Contributor

@coriolinus coriolinus commented Nov 7, 2025 •
edited
Loading

What's new in this PR

  • add the Keypackage type just straight using the OpenMLS one
  • add the KeypackageRef type just straight using the OpenMLS one actually we needed a fat ref after all
  • add a Keypackage.ref() method that returns a KeypackageRef
  • add the following methods:
    • client.generateKeypackages
    • client.getKeypackages
    • client.removeKeypackage
    • client.removeKeypackagesFor
  • add comprehensive tests for the new API to all bindings
    • ts
    • kotlin
    • swift
  • update client.removeCredential to remove all key packages related to the credential
  • remove old API related to key packages, and in particular:
    • clientKeypackages
    • deleteStaleKeypackages
    • clientValidKeypackagesCount
PR Submission Checklist for internal contributors
  • The PR Title
    • conforms to the style of semantic commits messages¹ supported in Wire's Github Workflow²
    • contains a reference JIRA issue number like SQPIT-764
    • answers the question: If merged, this PR will: ... ³
  1. https://sparkbox.com/foundry/semantic_commit_messages
  2. https://github.com/wireapp/.github#usage
  3. E.g. feat(conversation-list): Sort conversations by most emojis in the title #SQPIT-764.

@coriolinus coriolinus requested a review from a team as a code owner November 7, 2025 16:38
@coriolinus coriolinus marked this pull request as draft November 7, 2025 16:38
@coriolinus
Copy link
Contributor Author

coriolinus commented Nov 11, 2025

How to handle the migration:

  • migrate signature scheme to ciphersuite
    • where unambiguous, it's easy
    • where ambiguous, duplicate the entries
  • ensure we have both "find by signature scheme" and "find by ciphersuite" on credential ref
  • and find by ciphersuite exists at the FFI layer

@coriolinus coriolinus force-pushed the prgn/feat/19574-new-keypackage-api branch 3 times, most recently from f6e27a8 to c223af1 Compare November 19, 2025 16:24
@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Nov 20, 2025 •
edited
Loading

🐰 Bencher Report

Branchprgn/feat/19574-new-keypackage-api
Testbedubuntu-latest

⚠️ WARNING: No Threshold found!

Without a Threshold, no Alerts will ever be generated.

Click here to create a new Threshold
For more information, see the Threshold documentation.
To only post results if a Threshold exists, set the --ci-only-thresholds flag.

Click to view all benchmark results
BenchmarkLatencymicroseconds (µs)
Commit add f(group size)/cs1/mem/1002📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD		17,541.00 µs
Commit add f(group size)/cs1/mem/2📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD		790.41 µs
Commit add f(group size)/cs1/mem/202📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD		4,294.50 µs
Commit add f(group size)/cs1/mem/402📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD		7,654.30 µs
Commit add f(group size)/cs1/mem/602📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD		11,603.00 µs
Commit add f(group size)/cs1/mem/802📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD		14,439.00 µs
Commit add f(number clients)/cs1/mem/1002📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD		996,710.00 µs
Commit add f(number clients)/cs1/mem/2📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD		764.30 µs
Commit add f(number clients)/cs1/mem/202📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD		79,536.00 µs
Commit add f(number clients)/cs1/mem/402📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD		218,150.00 µs
Commit add f(number clients)/cs1/mem/602📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD		431,060.00 µs
Commit add f(number clients)/cs1/mem/802📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD		682,620.00 µs
Commit pending proposals f(group size)/cs1/mem/1002📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD		116,520.00 µs
Commit pending proposals f(group size)/cs1/mem/2📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD		23,494.00 µs
Commit pending proposals f(group size)/cs1/mem/202📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD		42,286.00 µs
Commit pending proposals f(group size)/cs1/mem/402📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD		58,044.00 µs
Commit pending proposals f(group size)/cs1/mem/602📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD		77,946.00 µs
Commit pending proposals f(group size)/cs1/mem/802📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD		93,300.00 µs
Commit pending proposals f(pending size)/cs1/mem/1📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD		17,199.00 µs
Commit pending proposals f(pending size)/cs1/mem/101📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD		115,750.00 µs
Commit pending proposals f(pending size)/cs1/mem/21📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD		34,466.00 µs
Commit pending proposals f(pending size)/cs1/mem/41📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD		55,999.00 µs
Commit pending proposals f(pending size)/cs1/mem/61📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD		75,451.00 µs
Commit pending proposals f(pending size)/cs1/mem/81📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD		95,282.00 µs
Commit remove f(group size)/cs1/mem/1002📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD		10,987.00 µs
Commit remove f(group size)/cs1/mem/2📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD		576.92 µs
Commit remove f(group size)/cs1/mem/202📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD		2,324.10 µs
Commit remove f(group size)/cs1/mem/402📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD		4,252.20 µs
Commit remove f(group size)/cs1/mem/602📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD		6,486.00 µs
Commit remove f(group size)/cs1/mem/802📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD		8,890.40 µs
Commit remove f(number clients)/cs1/mem/1002📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD		14,407.00 µs
Commit remove f(number clients)/cs1/mem/2📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD		135,220.00 µs
Commit remove f(number clients)/cs1/mem/202📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD		111,290.00 µs
Commit remove f(number clients)/cs1/mem/402📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD		86,779.00 µs
Commit remove f(number clients)/cs1/mem/602📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD		62,649.00 µs
Commit remove f(number clients)/cs1/mem/802📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD		38,278.00 µs
Commit update f(group size)/cs1/mem/1002📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD		135,420.00 µs
Commit update f(group size)/cs1/mem/2📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD		759.51 µs
Commit update f(group size)/cs1/mem/202📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD		27,982.00 µs
Commit update f(group size)/cs1/mem/402📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD		55,092.00 µs
Commit update f(group size)/cs1/mem/602📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD		83,038.00 µs
Commit update f(group size)/cs1/mem/802📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD		108,880.00 µs
🐰 View full continuous benchmarking report in Bencher

@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Nov 20, 2025

🐰 Bencher Report

Branchprgn/feat/19574-new-keypackage-api
Testbedubuntu-latest

⚠️ WARNING: No Threshold found!

Without a Threshold, no Alerts will ever be generated.

Click here to create a new Threshold
For more information, see the Threshold documentation.
To only post results if a Threshold exists, set the --ci-only-thresholds flag.

Click to view all benchmark results
BenchmarkLatencymilliseconds (ms)
decrypt1000MessagesWeb📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD		251.10 ms
🐰 View full continuous benchmarking report in Bencher

@coriolinus coriolinus force-pushed the prgn/feat/19574-new-keypackage-api branch 22 times, most recently from 27cbc33 to fb05227 Compare November 27, 2025 09:16
@coriolinus
test(swift): add tests for new keypackage api
76b6bb1
@coriolinus
chore: add some tsdoc @param notations
b742863
@coriolinus
chore: reexport some more ts types for documentation
fc25147
@coriolinus
feat: add utility methods to KeyPackageExt
7c94503 
These methods will be particularly useful later on, when we want to
implement the trait on a fatter ref type.
@coriolinus
feat: make keypackage refs fat
9ea95b7 
The new CC API involves minimizing transfer of biggish data across
the FFI boundary, and using smaller typesafe references instead wherever
possible.

These references should know enough about their referenced struct to
cheaply do relevant sorting and filtering operations.

We'd previously been exposing the raw OpenMLS `KeyPackage` and `KeyPackageRef`
types. However, `KeyPackageRef` doesn't know enough about its referenced
Keypackage to be useful. So we fatten it in this commit so that we can
remove obsolete methods without losing functionality.
@coriolinus
chore: rm old client_keypackages method
83e5704
@coriolinus
chore: rm old deleteStaleKeypackages method
98053e2
@coriolinus
chore: rm old client_valid_keypackages_count method
d909bd7
@coriolinus
chore: rm old prune_keypackages method
937af61
@coriolinus
chore: rm old generate_one_keypackage_from_credential method
569845f
@coriolinus
chore: transaction context uses proper keypackage, ref structs
07c8cf9
@coriolinus
chore: CC tests compile with new keypackage api
ead8fa1
@coriolinus
chore(ffi): update to new keypackage api
75aacba 
Mostly this is about making `KeypackageRef` a fat ref not just a pointer,
and reexporting its data methods so clients can see them.
@coriolinus
chore(interop): update to new keypackage api
a39d68f
@coriolinus
chore(docs): ensure intra-doc links work
b38a15b
@coriolinus
chore: fix clippy lints
dcb24f5
@coriolinus
chore(benches): refactor initialization for better credential handling
2c66c3f
@coriolinus
chore: fix a test which was failing due to changed semantics
c6928f6 
Somehow it used to be that going through an e2ei enrollment would
just automatically clear out all keypackages created with a basic
credential, despite comments in the code mentioning that this could
potentially lead to orphan keypackages.

We've removed the method which did that, so now those keypackages
are no longer removed, which meant we needed to adjust this test.
@coriolinus
chore: fix a test which was failing due to changed semantics
d47e27b 
This test assumed that e2ei rotation implicitly cleared out all existing
keypackages and also generated an equal number of new ones. That behavior
cannot remain with the new keypackage API, so we needed to adjust this test
to test the actual behavior.
@coriolinus
chore(ts): remove removed methods
44f5f2e
@coriolinus
chore(ts): adjust tests to use only new keypackage api
c4d03ff
@coriolinus
chore(ts): update docs to not mention removed methods
e8aedee
@coriolinus
chore(jvm): adapt tests to new keypackage api
007a941
@coriolinus
chore(swift): adjust tests to the new api
cf89d42
@coriolinus
chore(interop/js): adjust to new api
366969e
@coriolinus
chore: cargo +nightly fmt
beab6cd
@coriolinus
chore(js): copy bun tests into browser context
326ba95
@coriolinus coriolinus force-pushed the prgn/feat/19574-new-keypackage-api branch from 524fde3 to 326ba95 Compare December 1, 2025 16:09
@coriolinus coriolinus merged commit 326ba95 into main Dec 1, 2025
34 checks passed
@coriolinus coriolinus deleted the prgn/feat/19574-new-keypackage-api branch December 1, 2025 16:09
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@istankovic istankovic istankovic left review comments

@fewerner fewerner fewerner left review comments

@SimonThormeyer SimonThormeyer SimonThormeyer approved these changes

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@coriolinus @istankovic @fewerner @SimonThormeyer