Skip to content

Add upload keystore fingerprint to assetlinks.json reference copy#165

Merged
malkoG merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
fix/assetlinks-upload-key
Jul 19, 2026
Merged

Add upload keystore fingerprint to assetlinks.json reference copy#165
malkoG merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
fix/assetlinks-upload-key

Conversation

@malkoG

@malkoG malkoG commented Jul 19, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Problem

docs/assetlinks.json here is a reference copy of the Digital Asset Links file served from hackers-pub/hackerspub. It only listed the Google Play App Signing certificate fingerprint for pub.hackers.android, missing the fingerprint of hackerspub-release.jks — the keystore this repo's own .github/workflows/fdroid-release.yml uses to sign APKs distributed via GitHub Releases/F-Droid. Those installs fail Android's Digital Asset Links check (needed for passkey support) because their signing cert isn't listed.

Companion PR on the backend: hackers-pub/hackerspub#362, which fixes the same gap in the actually-served assetlinks.json files and adds the corresponding entry to models/passkey.ts's WebAuthn origin allowlist.

Fix

Add 52:A0:14:21:...:64:D5:1A (the hackerspub-release.jks fingerprint, confirmed via keytool -list -v -keystore hackerspub-release.jks -alias hackerspub) alongside the existing Play Signing fingerprint.

AI Disclosure

Investigated and drafted with Claude Code (claude-sonnet-5); see hackers-pub/hackerspub#362 for the full investigation. Change here is a one-line JSON addition to keep this reference copy in sync; verified against the actual hackerspub-release.jks file in this repo.

Keep this in sync with the served copies in hackers-pub/hackerspub:
pub.hackers.android is also distributed via GitHub Releases/F-Droid,
built directly from hackerspub-release.jks rather than re-signed by
Google Play, and that certificate's fingerprint was missing.

Assisted-by: Claude Code:claude-sonnet-5
@coderabbitai

coderabbitai Bot commented Jul 19, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Warning

Review limit reached

@malkoG, you've reached your PR review limit, so we couldn't start this review.

Next review available in: 59 minutes

Enable usage-based reviews in Billing to review now. Otherwise, wait until the next included review is available.
You're only billed for reviews past your plan's rate limits ($0.25/file).

How can I continue?

After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the @coderabbitai review command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.

To avoid repeated limits, reduce automatic review volume by pausing incremental auto-reviews earlier, using label-based review opt-in, excluding WIP or generated PR titles, or requesting reviews manually when the PR is ready. If your team needs uninterrupted high-volume reviews, an organization admin can enable usage-based reviews.

How do review limits work?

CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits for each organization. Most developers receive the normal plan review availability.

For paid Pro and Pro+ PR reviews, CodeRabbit uses adaptive limits for sustained high-volume activity. When a developer's recent PR review activity reaches the 95th percentile or higher among CodeRabbit users, additional reviews become available more gradually as earlier reviews age out of the rolling window.

Please refer docs for additional details.

Review details
⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 298daecc-3890-44ad-aba4-50831bbcb9fe

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between a7ab003 and 853b405.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • docs/assetlinks.json

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.

@malkoG
malkoG merged commit d178abd into main Jul 19, 2026
2 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant