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

Cryptolib#159 - Key Management #166

Merged
merged 10 commits into from
Jun 16, 2023
Merged

Cryptolib#159 - Key Management #166

merged 10 commits into from
Jun 16, 2023

Conversation

jlucas9
Copy link
Collaborator

@jlucas9 jlucas9 commented Jun 14, 2023

Please review and make comments as you have them!

@jlucas9 jlucas9 self-assigned this Jun 14, 2023
Copy link
Contributor

@dccutrig dccutrig left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Reviewing this and had a thought looking over lines like the following:

extern int32_t Crypto_Config_CryptoLib(uint8_t key_type, uint8_t sadb_type, uint8_t cryptography_type, uint8_t crypto_create_fecf, uint8_t process_sdls_pdus, uint8_t has_pus_hdr, uint8_t ignore_sa_state, uint8_t ignore_anti_replay, uint8_t unique_sa_per_mapid, uint8_t crypto_check_fecf, uint8_t vcid_bitmask, uint8_t crypto_increment_nontransmitted_iv);

Should we split this config into two configuration functions? One for configuring interfaces, and one for configuring behavior?

e.g. : Crypto_Config_Interfaces(key_type, sadb_type, cryptography_type)
Crypto_Config_Behavior(crypto_create_fecf, process_sdls_pdus, has_pus_hdr, ignore_sa_state, ignore_anti_replay, unique_sa_per_mapid, crypto_check_fecf, vcid_bitmask, crypto_increment_nontransmitted_iv);

@jlucas9 jlucas9 mentioned this pull request Jun 16, 2023
@jlucas9
Copy link
Collaborator Author

jlucas9 commented Jun 16, 2023

Added a comment to the #165 to capture Cody's input above!

@jlucas9 jlucas9 merged commit ef88a4e into dev Jun 16, 2023
@jlucas9 jlucas9 deleted the cryptolib#159-Key-Log-Mgmt branch June 16, 2023 14:44
@jlucas9 jlucas9 mentioned this pull request Jul 19, 2023
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.

4 participants