Skip to content

Comments

Add dsa keygen to providers#11303

Closed
slontis wants to merge 2 commits intoopenssl:masterfrom
slontis:prov_dsa_keygen
Closed

Add dsa keygen to providers#11303
slontis wants to merge 2 commits intoopenssl:masterfrom
slontis:prov_dsa_keygen

Conversation

@slontis
Copy link
Member

@slontis slontis commented Mar 11, 2020

Checklist
  • documentation is added or updated
  • tests are added or updated

@slontis slontis added the branch: master Applies to master branch label Mar 11, 2020
@slontis
Copy link
Member Author

slontis commented Mar 11, 2020

The first commit is just a collapsed copy of #10289 and will be removed..

@levitte
Copy link
Member

levitte commented Mar 11, 2020

This got me to raise #11306

@levitte
Copy link
Member

levitte commented Mar 11, 2020

I've tested this PR merged with the latest #10289 and with the mod suggested in #11303 (comment), and it worked flawlessly.

@slontis
Copy link
Member Author

slontis commented Mar 11, 2020

This PR is Not ready yet - major surgery in progress :)

@levitte
Copy link
Member

levitte commented Mar 11, 2020

Okie.

@slontis slontis marked this pull request as ready for review March 12, 2020 11:10
@slontis slontis added the approval: review pending This pull request needs review by a committer label Mar 12, 2020
@slontis
Copy link
Member Author

slontis commented Mar 12, 2020

ping

@slontis
Copy link
Member Author

slontis commented Mar 14, 2020

@levitte - on a related note (I am setting gindex and seed - which I can print out)..
What is the mechanism to retrieve these values out of the pkey (I dont want to go adding DSA_ API accessors if I can help it). It looks like I need a getparams type method to do this? (Could this be a todata operation??).

Being able to retrieve them from the generation is not the right place?
i.e- We can still load a key from file - and then need to be able to set and get these extra values out of a key (regardless of the operation??)

@slontis
Copy link
Member Author

slontis commented Mar 14, 2020

Updated to address review comments

@levitte
Copy link
Member

levitte commented Mar 16, 2020

Regarding extracting pkey values, we have the KEYMGMT export function. We need to craft functions around that. Some kind of inverse of the fromdata functionality, say?

@slontis slontis force-pushed the prov_dsa_keygen branch 2 times, most recently from 3318895 to 5f42670 Compare March 30, 2020 02:25
@slontis
Copy link
Member Author

slontis commented Mar 30, 2020

dependent on #11365 (Needs to be rebased to remove commit 1)

@levitte
Copy link
Member

levitte commented Apr 8, 2020

Just to make sure I hadn't made a gaffe in #11422, I rebased this on top of current master...

: ; make test TESTS=test_cms 
make depend && make _tests
make[1]: Entering directory '/home/levitte/gitwrk/openssl.net/official/_build'
make[1]: Leaving directory '/home/levitte/gitwrk/openssl.net/official/_build'
make[1]: Entering directory '/home/levitte/gitwrk/openssl.net/official/_build'
( SRCTOP=../master \
  BLDTOP=. \
  PERL="/usr/bin/perl" \
  EXE_EXT= \
  /usr/bin/perl ../master/test/run_tests.pl test_cms )
80-test_cms.t .. Dubious, test returned 1 (wstat 256, 0x100)
Failed 1/7 subtests 

Test Summary Report
-------------------
80-test_cms.t (Wstat: 256 Tests: 7 Failed: 1)
  Failed test:  4
  Non-zero exit status: 1
Files=1, Tests=7,  6 wallclock secs ( 0.06 usr  0.01 sys +  3.62 cusr  0.83 csys =  4.52 CPU)
Result: FAIL
make[1]: *** [Makefile:2386: _tests] Error 1
make[1]: Leaving directory '/home/levitte/gitwrk/openssl.net/official/_build'
make: *** [Makefile:2383: tests] Fel 2

I have no idea what's going on, but gotta admit I'm glad it wasn't me ;-)

@levitte
Copy link
Member

levitte commented Apr 8, 2020

That is to say, anything you can do to rebase this and make it work would be very helpful. Please?

@slontis
Copy link
Member Author

slontis commented Apr 14, 2020

@mattcaswell - please have another look.

Copy link
Member

@mattcaswell mattcaswell left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Approved assuming the CIs agree.

@slontis slontis added approval: done This pull request has the required number of approvals and removed approval: review pending This pull request needs review by a committer labels Apr 14, 2020
@slontis
Copy link
Member Author

slontis commented Apr 15, 2020

Had to rebase because of libcrypto.num - so also collapsed commits.
Will probably rebase again in the next 10 hours :)

@mattcaswell
Copy link
Member

My approval holds in spite of rebases

@slontis
Copy link
Member Author

slontis commented Apr 15, 2020

Rebased again because of libcrypto.num

@slontis slontis self-assigned this Apr 15, 2020
slontis added 2 commits April 15, 2020 20:33
Moved some shared FFC code into the FFC files.
Added extra paramgen parameters for seed, gindex.
Fixed bug in ossl_prov util to print bignums.
@slontis
Copy link
Member Author

slontis commented Apr 15, 2020

Sigh.. Rebased again because of libcrypto.num

@mattcaswell
Copy link
Member

Still good...

@mattcaswell mattcaswell added approval: ready to merge The 24 hour grace period has passed, ready to merge and removed approval: done This pull request has the required number of approvals labels Apr 15, 2020
@mattcaswell
Copy link
Member

Seems to be ready-to-merge

@slontis
Copy link
Member Author

slontis commented Apr 15, 2020

Should I wait until at least travis passes again?

@mattcaswell
Copy link
Member

Should I wait until at least travis passes again?

If it was passing before the libcrypto.num conflicts then I see no need.

@slontis
Copy link
Member Author

slontis commented Apr 15, 2020

Ok What could go wrong :)

openssl-machine pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 15, 2020
Moved some shared FFC code into the FFC files.
Added extra paramgen parameters for seed, gindex.
Fixed bug in ossl_prov util to print bignums.

Reviewed-by: Matt Caswell <[email protected]>
(Merged from #11303)
@slontis
Copy link
Member Author

slontis commented Apr 15, 2020

Merged to master..

@slontis slontis closed this Apr 15, 2020
@richsalz
Copy link
Contributor

perhaps open an issue to track the "undocumented names in core_names.h"?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

approval: ready to merge The 24 hour grace period has passed, ready to merge branch: master Applies to master branch

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants