This was done just by grepping for 'size_t i;' and 'size_t j;'. I left
everything in crypto/x509 and friends alone.
There's some instances in gcm.c that are non-trivial and pulled into a
separate CL for ease of review.
Change-Id: I6515804e3097f7e90855f1e7610868ee87117223
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/10801
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Commit-Queue: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
CQ-Verified: CQ bot account: commit-bot@chromium.org <commit-bot@chromium.org>
We were sending decode_error, but the spec explicitly says (RFC 5246):
unsupported_extension
sent by clients that receive an extended server hello containing
an extension that they did not put in the corresponding client
hello. This message is always fatal.
Also add a test for this when it's a known but unoffered extension. We
actually end up putting these in different codepaths now due to the
custom extensions stuff.
Thanks to Eric Rescorla for pointing this out.
Change-Id: If6c8033d4cfe69ef8af5678b873b25e0dbadfc4f
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/9061
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
CQ-Verified: CQ bot account: commit-bot@chromium.org <commit-bot@chromium.org>
ssl.h should be first. Also two lines after includes and the rest of the
file.
Change-Id: Icb7586e00a3e64170082c96cf3f8bfbb2b7e1611
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/5892
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Due to a typo, when a server sent an unknown extension, the extension
number would be taken from a NULL structure rather than from the
variable of the same name that's in the local scope.
BUG=517935
Change-Id: I29d5eb3c56cded40f6155a81556199f12439ae06
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/5650
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
This change mirrors upstream's custom extension API because we have some
internal users that depend on it.
Change-Id: I408e442de0a55df7b05c872c953ff048cd406513
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/5471
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
