53affef486
https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/31085 wasn't right. We already forbid creating BN_MONT_CTX on negative numbers, which means almost all moduli already don't work with BN_mod_exp_mont. Only -1 happened to not get rejected, but it computed the wrong value. Reject it instead. Update-Note: BN_mod_exp* will no longer work for negative moduli. It already didn't work for all negative odd moduli other than -1, so rejecting -1 and negative evens is unlikely to be noticed. Bug: 71 Change-Id: I7c713d417e2e6512f3e78f402de88540809977e3 Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/31484 Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com> |
||
---|---|---|
.. | ||
aes | ||
bn | ||
cipher | ||
des | ||
digest | ||
ec | ||
ecdh | ||
ecdsa | ||
hmac | ||
md4 | ||
md5 | ||
modes | ||
policydocs | ||
rand | ||
rsa | ||
self_check | ||
sha | ||
tls | ||
bcm.c | ||
CMakeLists.txt | ||
delocate.h | ||
FIPS.md | ||
intcheck1.png | ||
intcheck2.png | ||
intcheck3.png | ||
is_fips.c |