Fix getPairedClients for un-elevated native messaging process.

remoting/protocol/pairing_registry.cc

 // Copyright 2013 The Chromium Authors. All rights reserved.
 // Use of this source code is governed by a BSD-style license that can be
 // found in the LICENSE file.
 
 #include "remoting/protocol/pairing_registry.h"
 
 #include "base/base64.h"
 #include "base/bind.h"
 #include "base/guid.h"
 #include "base/json/json_string_value_serializer.h"
@@ skipping 72 matching lines @@
 }
 
 bool PairingRegistry::Pairing::operator==(const Pairing& other) const {
   return created_time_ == other.created_time_ &&
          client_id_ == other.client_id_ &&
          client_name_ == other.client_name_ &&
          shared_secret_ == other.shared_secret_;
 }
 
 bool PairingRegistry::Pairing::is_valid() const {
-  return !client_id_.empty() && !shared_secret_.empty();
+  // |shared_secret_| is optional. It will be empty on Windows because the
+  // privileged registry key can only be read in the elevated host process.

[Jamie, 2014/02/22 00:28:39]

Could we fix this by setting a dummy value for the shared secret on Windows? I
would prefer that we don't change the validity semantics for a Pairing to match
a particular platform's implementation of the storage layer.

+  return !client_id_.empty();
 }
 
 PairingRegistry::PairingRegistry(
     scoped_refptr<base::SingleThreadTaskRunner> delegate_task_runner,
     scoped_ptr<Delegate> delegate)
     : caller_task_runner_(base::ThreadTaskRunnerHandle::Get()),
       delegate_task_runner_(delegate_task_runner),
       delegate_(delegate.Pass()) {
   DCHECK(delegate_);
 }
@@ skipping 187 matching lines @@
 
 void PairingRegistry::ServiceNextRequest() {
   if (pending_requests_.empty())
     return;
 
   PostTask(delegate_task_runner_, FROM_HERE, pending_requests_.front());
 }
 
 }  // namespace protocol
 }  // namespace remoting