d2i_ASN1_BOOLEAN and i2d_ASN1_BOOLEAN don't go through the macros
because ASN1_BOOLEAN is a slightly weird type (int instead of pointer).
Their tag checks were missing a few bits.
This does not affect any other d2i functions. Those already go through
the ASN1_ITEM machinery.
Change-Id: Ic892cd2a8b8f9ceb11e43d931f8aa6df921997d3
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/49866
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
This makes it slightly clearer which ints are lengths and which are
substituting for T*. (ASN1_BOOLEAN is weird. It is the one non-pointer
representation in crypto/asn1.)
Change-Id: I93ff87264835e64c9f8613edae63e93731e77548
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/49865
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
asn1_ex_i2c actually does have an error condition, it just wasn't being
handled.
628b3c7f2f, imported from upstream's
f3f8e72f494b36d05e0d04fe418f92b692fbb261, tried to check for OID-less
ASN1_OBJECTs and return an error. But it and the upstream change didn't
actually work. -1 in this function means to omit the object, so OpenSSL
was silently misinterpreting the input structure.
This changes the calling convention for asn1_ex_i2c to support this. It
is, unfortunately, a little messy because:
1. One cannot check for object presense without walking the
ASN1_ITEM/ASN1_TEMPLATE structures. You can *almost* check if *pval
is NULL, but ASN1_BOOLEAN is an int with -1 to indicate an omitted
optional. There are also FBOOLEAN/TBOOLEAN types that omit FALSE/TRUE
for DEFAULT. Thus, without more invasive changes, asn1_ex_i2c must be
able to report an omitted element.
2. While the i2d functions report an omitted element by successfully
writing zero bytes, i2c only writes the contents. It thus must
distinguish between an omitted element and an element with
zero-length contents.
3. i2c_ASN1_INTEGER and i2c_ASN1_BIT_STRING return zero on error rather
than -1. Those error paths are not actually reachable because they
only check for NULL. In fact, OpenSSL has even unexported them. But I
found a few callers. Rather than unwind all this and change the
calling convention, I've just made it handle 0 and map to -1 for now.
It's all a no-op anyway, and hopefully we can redo all this with CBB
later.
I've just added an output parameter for now.
In writing tests, I also noticed that the hand-written i2d_ASN1_OBJECT
and i2d_ASN1_BOOLEAN return the wrong value for errors, so I've fixed
that.
Update-Note: A default-constructed object with a required ASN1_OBJECT
field can no longer be encoded without initializing the ASN1_OBJECT.
Note this affects X509: the signature algorithm is an ASN1_OBJECT. Tests
that try to serialize an X509_new() must fill in all required fields.
(Production code is unlikely to be affected because the output was
unparsable anyway, while tests sometimes wouldn't notice.)
Bug: 429
Change-Id: I04417f5ad6b994cc5ccca540c8a7714b9b3af33d
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/49348
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
The ASN1_BOOLEAN representation is a mess. ASN1_BOOLEAN is an int
and if non-negative (negative values mean omitted or default), gets cast
to uint8_t and encoded as the value. This means callers are simply
expected to know true is 0xff, not 1. Fix this by only encoding 0 or
0xff.
This also fixes a bug where values like 0x100 are interpreted as true
(e.g. in the tasn_enc.c logic to handle default values), but encoded as
false because the cast only looks at the least significant byte.
This CL does not change the parsing behavior, which is to allow any BER
encoding and preserve the value in the in-memory representation (though
we should tighten that). However the BER encode will no longer be
preserved when re-encoding.
Update-Note: Callers setting ASN1_BOOLEANs to a positive value other
than 0xff will now encode 0xff. This probably fixes a bug, but if anyone
was attaching significance to incorrectly-encoded booleans, that will
break.
Change-Id: I5bb53e068d5900daca07299a27c0551e78ffa91d
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/46924
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
David Benjamin
Adam Langley