Avoid compiler errors when MBEDTLS_PSA_CRYPTO_KEY_FILE_ID_ENCODES_OWNER
is set by using the application ID type.
[Error] psa_crypto_slot_management.c@175,9: used type 'psa_key_id_t' (aka 'psa_key_file_id_t') where arithmetic or pointer type is required
From the implementation point of view does not make much difference to
constrain the input order.
We constrain it because, this way the code is easier to review, the data
flow easier to understand and the implementations in general are easier
to validate.
Convert the description of PSA_ALG_TLS12_PRF and
PSA_ALG_TLS12_PSK_TO_MS to the key derivation API that takes one input
at a time rather than the old {secret,salt,label} interface.
Define a new input category "seed".
“Tampering detected” was misleading because in the real world it can
also arise due to a software bug. “Corruption detected” is neutral and
more precisely reflects what can trigger the error.
perl -i -pe 's/PSA_ERROR_TAMPERING_DETECTED/PSA_ERROR_CORRUPTION_DETECTED/gi' $(git ls-files)
Move DSA-related key types and algorithms to the
implementation-specific header file. Not that we actually implement
DSA, but with domain parameters, we should be able to.
Parametrize finite-field Diffie-Hellman key types with a DH group
identifier, in the same way elliptic curve keys are parametrized with
an EC curve identifier.
Define the DH groups from the TLS registry (these are the groups from
RFC 7919).
Replicate the macro definitions and the metadata tests from elliptic
curve identifiers to DH group identifiers.
Define PSA_DH_GROUP_CUSTOM as an implementation-specific extension for
which domain parameters are used to specify the group.
Define a range of key identifiers for use by the application
(0..2^30-1), a range for use by implementations (2^30..2^31), and a
range that is reserved for future use (2^31..2^32-1).
Declare algorithms for ChaCha20 and ChaCha20-Poly1305, and a
corresponding (common) key type.
Don't declare Poly1305 as a separate algorithm because it's a one-time
authenticator, not a MAC, so the API isn't suitable for it (no way to
use a nonce).
This gives a little more room to encode key agreement algorithms,
while keeping enough space for key derivation algorithms.
This doesn't affect any of the already-defined algorithms.
Merge the Mbed Crypto development branch a little after
mbedcrypto-1.0.0 into the PSA Crypto API 1.0 beta branch a little
after beta 2.
Summary of merge conflicts:
* Some features (psa_copy_key, public key format without
SubjectPublicKeyInfo wrapping) went into both sides, but with a few
improvements on the implementation side. For those, take the
implementation side.
* The key derivation API changed considerably on the API side. This
merge commit generally goes with the updated API except in the tests
where it keeps some aspects of the implementation.
Due to the divergence between the two branches on key derivation and
key agreement, test_suite_psa_crypto does not compile. This will be
resolved in subsequent commits.
New function psa_copy_key().
Conflicts:
* library/psa_crypto.c: trivial conflicts due to consecutive changes.
* tests/suites/test_suite_psa_crypto.data: the same code
was added on both sides, but with a conflict resolution on one side.
* tests/suites/test_suite_psa_crypto_metadata.function: the same code
was added on both sides, but with a conflict resolution on one side.
You can use PSA_ALG_ANY_HASH to build the algorithm value for a
hash-and-sign algorithm in a policy. Then the policy allows usage with
this hash-and-sign family with any hash.
Test that PSA_ALG_ANY_HASH-based policies allow a specific hash, but
not a different hash-and-sign family. Test that PSA_ALG_ANY_HASH is
not valid for operations, only in policies.
Test for a subclass of public-key algorithm: those that perform
full-domain hashing, i.e. algorithms that can be broken down as
sign(key, hash(message)).
Change the key derivation API to take inputs in multiple steps,
instead of a single one-site-fits-poorly function.
Conflicts:
* include/psa/crypto.h: merge independent changes in the documentation
of psa_key_agreement (public_key from the work on public key formats
vs general description and other parameters in the work on key derivation).
* tests/suites/test_suite_psa_crypto.data: update the key agreement
tests from the work on key derivation to the format from the work on
public key formats.
* tests/suites/test_suite_psa_crypto_metadata.function: reconcile the
addition of unrelated ALG_IS_xxx macros
Get rid of "key selection" algorithms (of which there was only one:
raw key selection).
Encode key agreement by combining a raw key agreement with a KDF,
rather than passing the KDF as an argument of a key agreement macro.
It isn't a good fit. It's overly complex for what the API can do now,
which is Diffie-Hellman. Consider it again later for more complex use
cases such as authenticated key exchanges.
Use separate step types for a KDF secret and for the private key in a
key agreement.
Determine which key type is allowed from the step type, independently
of the KDF.
Forbid raw inputs for certain steps. They definitely should be
forbidden for asymmetric keys, which are structured. Also forbid them
for KDF secrets: the secrets are supposed to be keys, even if they're
unstructured.
