The indices do fit in unsigned, but we're not taking any advantage of
this because of struct padding, and the RSA structure is not that
memory-sensitive.
Bug: 516
Change-Id: I678e20fcd6f6fa8f69eaef1f4108fa94194b6ee7
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/55270
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
While I'm here, use a fixed-size uint64_t in RSA_generate_key, rather
than unsigned long. This code also assumes unsigned long fits in
BN_ULONG, which is probably true on all platforms we care about, but
unnecessarily fussy.
The RSA_sign -> RSA_METHOD transition does require a cast. Go ahead and
check length/hash_nid consistency so we know it fits in the cast. This
does mean RSA_METHOD-backed keys are restricted to implementing digests
that we support, but that's probably fine. If anything, I think we
should try to shift away from RSA_METHOD as a story for custom keys.
Bug: 516
Change-Id: I3969da67d1daeff882279a534eb48ca831eb16cd
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/54465
Commit-Queue: Bob Beck <bbe@google.com>
Auto-Submit: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Bob Beck <bbe@google.com>
OpenSSL 1.1.0 made this structure opaque. I don't think we particularly
need to make it opaque, but external code uses it. Also add
RSA_test_flags.
Change-Id: I136d38e72ec4664c78f4d1720ec691f5760090c1
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/50605
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
There are a lot of d2i and i2d functions, and there will be even more
once asn1.h and x509.h are properly documented. We currently replicate
the text in each, but as a result a miss a few points:
- The i2d outp != NULL, *outp == NULL case isn't documented at all.
- We should call out what to do with *inp after d2i.
- Unlike our rewritten functions, object reuse is still quite rampant
with the asn1.h functions. I hope we can get rid of that but, until we
can, it would be nice to describe it in one place.
While I'm here, update a few references to the latest PKCS#1 RFC, and
try to align how we reference ASN.1 structures a bit. The d2i/i2d
functions say "ASN.1, DER-encoded RSA private key" while the CBS/CBB
functions say "DER-encoded RSAPrivateKey structure".
Bug: 426
Change-Id: I8d9a7b0aef3d6d9c8240136053c3b1704b09fd41
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/49906
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
We usually call the parameter 'digest', but people sometimes think they
can skip the hashing for short inputs are short. I also suspect the term
'digest' is less common. Add warnings about this.
There were also some cases where we called it 'in' and even 'msg'. This
CL fixes those to say 'digest'. Finally, RSA_{sign,verify}_raw are
documented to be building blocks of signature schemes, rather than
signature schemes themselves.
It's unfortunate that EVP_PKEY_sign means "sign a digest", while
EVP_DigestSign means "sign, likely internally digesting it as the first
step", but we're a bit stuck there.
Change-Id: I4c38afff9b6196e2789cf27653fe5e5e8c68c1bf
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/47504
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
David Benjamin
Shelley Vohr
Adam Langley