Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merge BoringSSL through 48dce6d6867dc36cdaf9178e63fed8bf0cbe7ece #2246

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Jan 18, 2025

Conversation

briansmith
Copy link
Owner

No description provided.

davidben and others added 5 commits January 25, 2024 20:13
BoringSSL is not affected by CVE-2024-0727, but these are good cases to
have in our unit tests.

PKCS#12 is built on top of PKCS#7, a misdesigned, overgeneralized combinator
format. One of the features of PKCS#7 is that the content of every
ContentInfo may be omitted, to indicate that the value is "supplied by other
means". This is commonly used for "detached signatures", where the signature
is supplied separately.

This does not make sense in the context of PKCS#12. But because PKCS#7
combined many unrelated use cases into the same format, so PKCS#12 (and any
other use of PKCS#7) must account for and reject inputs.

Change-Id: I22f19b6c14894003f7515206cd34f968e5503d4a
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/65747
Auto-Submit: David Benjamin <[email protected]>
Commit-Queue: Bob Beck <[email protected]>
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Bob Beck <[email protected]>
Per the header, these symbols were private and only exported for
decrepit. But decrepit can include internal headers.

Change-Id: I1155f4b98252004b80a53efb0a6009400a6c59ac
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/65687
Auto-Submit: David Benjamin <[email protected]>
Commit-Queue: Bob Beck <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Bob Beck <[email protected]>
These macros are unnamespaced and only used in one file. Keep their
definitions more local. Also remove the #undefs at the end of des.c.
They date to when des.c was part of bcm.c, but it isn't anymore.

Change-Id: I6306929929f2304b93c3fdb2e787965c40729d6a
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/65688
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Bob Beck <[email protected]>
Upstream does not actually have any tests for DES-EDE3-CFB, with the
exception of a single DES-EDE3-CFB1 test vector, only the single-DES
version. But we can gain some coverage by turning 3DES back into single
DES with a repeated key. That's good enough for DES.

The DES-EDE3-CFB1 test vector is unusable because that tests
EVP_des_ede3_cfb1, the real DES-EDE3-CFB1. OpenSSL's low-level APIs do
not actually implement CFB correctly for a non-whole-number of bytes!
See discussion in the test. I've added coverage for that case by just
fabricating a test vector.

Change-Id: I9f69cab4d8d1d3accecbeb09f8c1661ce2ecb4ee
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/65689
Reviewed-by: Bob Beck <[email protected]>
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <[email protected]>
@briansmith briansmith self-assigned this Jan 18, 2025
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 18, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 96.89%. Comparing base (c229242) to head (6705c4e).
Report is 6 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #2246   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   96.89%   96.89%           
=======================================
  Files         167      167           
  Lines       20687    20687           
  Branches      475      475           
=======================================
+ Hits        20044    20045    +1     
  Misses        546      546           
+ Partials       97       96    -1     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@briansmith briansmith merged commit 7ad7f45 into main Jan 18, 2025
169 checks passed
@briansmith briansmith deleted the b/boringssl-merge-10 branch January 18, 2025 05:34
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.

2 participants