[Documentation] Fix signature format documentation to match implementation#186
Open
vcolin7 wants to merge 1 commit intomodelcontextprotocol:mainfrom
Open
[Documentation] Fix signature format documentation to match implementation#186vcolin7 wants to merge 1 commit intomodelcontextprotocol:mainfrom
vcolin7 wants to merge 1 commit intomodelcontextprotocol:mainfrom
Conversation
Clarify the MCPB signature format in documentation.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Clarify the MCPB signature format in documentation
The signature format documentation in https://github.com/asklar/mcpb/tree/main/CLI.md#L116-L154 currently shows a simplified format that doesn't match the actual implementation. This PR corrects the documentation to accurately describe the binary signature structure.
Motivation and Context
The current documentation states that MCPB signatures use
[Base64-encoded PKCS#7 signature], but the actual implementation uses:This discrepancy causes issues for developers implementing MCPB signing outside of the official CLI. For example, Microsoft is integrating MCPB signing with our enterprise signing service (ESRP), and we discovered the documentation didn't match the actual format expected by
mcpb verify.The length prefix is essential because raw DER bytes could contain byte sequences that match
MCPB_SIG_END, making parsing ambiguous without knowing the exact signature length.How Has This Been Tested?
writeUInt32LE/readUInt32LE) and the C#/.NET implementation (BitConverter.GetBytes/BitConverter.ToInt32)mcpb verifycommand.Breaking Changes
None. This is a documentation-only change that corrects the docs to match existing behavior.
Types of changes
Checklist
Additional context
Current documentation (incorrect):
Proposed documentation (matches implementation):