Rename private key structures #362
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Let's use consistent naming for our key data structure. As outlined in this pull request comment [1], wording 'secret key' usually refers to symmetric keys and it is confusing in the context of asymmetric cryptography. We should use the traditional "private and public keys" terminology instead. Update the structure and variable names, command-line arguments and documentation to consistently use "private keys" everywhere. This is a breaking change due to structure renaming. [1]: cossacklabs#358 (comment)
vixentael
reviewed
Feb 3, 2019
Mass-renaming revealed a sleeper bug in memory allocation in unsafe code. Reserve correct amount of memory for RSA and ECDSA public keys. Co-Authored-by: ilammy <[email protected]>
vixentael
approved these changes
Feb 4, 2019
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Let‘s use consistent naming for our key data structures in Rust code. As outlined by @vixentael in this pull request comment, wording “secret key” usually refers to symmetric keys and it is confusing in the context of asymmetric cryptography. We should use the traditional “private and public keys” terminology instead. All other language wrappers and the core library do so.
Update the structure and variable names, command-line arguments and documentation to consistently use “private keys” everywhere. Avoid jokes about private parts. This is a breaking change due to structure renaming.