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

Add support for PKCS12_set_mac #2128

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

samuel40791765
Copy link
Contributor

Issues:

Addresses CryptoAlg-2821

Description of changes:

Ruby has added a binding for an additional function called PKCS12_set_mac in it's master branch: ruby/ruby@c79b435 This was discovered prior to the PR for Ruby's CI integration with the master branch being merged: #2071

OpenSSL's implementation of the function directly sets a designated mac field within the PKCS12 structure. Our PKCS12 structure is folded into a string of bytes along with its length and there aren't any available fields for us to directly set. This means that AWS-LC's implementation of PKCS12_set_mac has to parse the proper contents from PKCS12 and rerun the key and mac generation with the new parameters provided.

Call-outs:

  1. The parsing logic is similar to PKCS12_get_key_and_certs, but the logic can't be shared. This is because we need to maintain pointers to certain parts of the CBS parsers in PKCS12_set_mac, so that we can properly rewrite the contents later.
  2. I've abstracted the key and mac generation in PKCS12_create and PKCS12_set_mac to a single function called pkcs12_gen_and_write_mac.
  3. OpenSSL 3.0 uses SHA-256 as the default hash, yet OpenSSL 1.1.1 uses SHA1. TODO: Make a decision

Testing:

New Tests

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license and the ISC license.

@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Jan 18, 2025

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 85.71429% with 16 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 78.96%. Comparing base (81f138a) to head (72a0f41).

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
crypto/pkcs8/pkcs8_x509.c 78.94% 16 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #2128      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   78.95%   78.96%   +0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         610      610              
  Lines      105293   105372      +79     
  Branches    14919    14921       +2     
==========================================
+ Hits        83136    83211      +75     
- Misses      21505    21510       +5     
+ Partials      652      651       -1     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@samuel40791765 samuel40791765 marked this pull request as ready for review January 22, 2025 22:20
@samuel40791765 samuel40791765 requested a review from a team as a code owner January 22, 2025 22:20
@samuel40791765 samuel40791765 force-pushed the pkcs12-set-mac branch 3 times, most recently from 7f55519 to 655d214 Compare January 23, 2025 18:04
skmcgrail
skmcgrail previously approved these changes Jan 24, 2025
Copy link
Member

@skmcgrail skmcgrail left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Minor style feedback on tests, non-blocking.

@@ -533,7 +551,7 @@ static bssl::UniquePtr<X509> MakeTestCert(EVP_PKEY *key) {
return x509;
}

static bool PKCS12CreateVector(std::vector<uint8_t> *out, EVP_PKEY *pkey,
static bool PKCS12CreateVector(bssl::UniquePtr<PKCS12> *p12, EVP_PKEY *pkey,
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
static bool PKCS12CreateVector(bssl::UniquePtr<PKCS12> *p12, EVP_PKEY *pkey,
static bool PKCS12CreateVector(bssl::UniquePtr<PKCS12> & p12, EVP_PKEY *pkey,

You can just pass this by C++ reference right? Then you don't have to take the address of the UniquePtr every time you pass it in.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Agree with both comments, this was mostly me trying to hack something together while allowing the original code to use the same function.

crypto/pkcs8/pkcs12_test.cc Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
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.

3 participants