There's an authenticator, so test that AES_unwrap_key notices invalid
inputs.
Change-Id: Icbb941f91ffd9c91118f956fd74058d241f91ecb
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/13047
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>
Most C standard library functions are undefined if passed NULL, even
when the corresponding length is zero. This gives them (and, in turn,
all functions which call them) surprising behavior on empty arrays.
Some compilers will miscompile code due to this rule. See also
https://www.imperialviolet.org/2016/06/26/nonnull.html
Add OPENSSL_memcpy, etc., wrappers which avoid this problem.
BUG=23
Change-Id: I95f42b23e92945af0e681264fffaf578e7f8465e
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/12928
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
This finally removes the last Android hack. Both Chromium and Android
end up needing this thing (Chromium needs it for WebCrypto but currently
uses the EVP_AEAD version and Android needs it by way of
wpa_supplicant).
On the Android side, the alternative is we finish upstream's
NEED_INTERNAL_AES_WRAP patch, but then it just uses its own key-wrap
implementation. This seems a little silly, considering we have a version
of key-wrap under a different API anyway.
It also doesn't make much sense to leave the EVP_AEAD API around if we
don't want people to use it and Chromium's the only consumer. Remove it
and I'll switch Chromium to the new---er, old--- APIs next roll.
Change-Id: I23a89cda25bddb6ac1033e4cd408165f393d1e6c
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/11410
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
May as well. Depending on the implementation chosen in cipher/e_aes.c,
AES_encrypt may or may not be hit, so test this entry point explicitly.
Change-Id: Icb02bf3f4b6e5ecbb9e5111f44fbb1b267ead6c3
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/5312
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
