[Webkit-unassigned] [Bug 207174] Add WebCrypto LayoutTests to check if PKCS#7 padding is correctly implemented in AES-CBC

[bugzilla-daemon at webkit.org]

https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=207174

--- Comment #8 from Tomoki Imai <tomoki.imai at sony.com> ---
(In reply to Jiewen Tan from comment #5)
> (In reply to Tomoki Imai from comment #3)
> > (In reply to Jiewen Tan from comment #2)
> > > Not sure why this is needed? You have to implement PKCS#7 yourself?
> > 
> > I think we need this to validate all the padding is done as expected, and
> > our usage of underlying libraries like CommonCrypt, GCrypt, OpenSSL are
> > correct.
> 
> I don't buy that. Just like you don't write tests to validate WTF before you
> use stuffs from WTF. And I believe if you don't use PKCS#7, the existing
> tests won't pass.

Thanks for your reviews!

Right, We don't need to validate CommonCrypt, GCrypt, and OpenSSL itself.
I think the PKCS#7 test cases to cover boundary values are needed from the viewpoint of JavaScript interface, in the other word, black-box testing.
In my opinion, we should validate all the JavaScript interface, regardless of how they are implemented in platform layer.

> And I believe if you don't use PKCS#7, the existing tests won't pass.

Yes, but we didn't have enough test cases to cover boundary values in PKCS#7 now.

> > 
> > For OpenSSL backend, we don't have to implement PKCS#7 by ourselves, but we
> > need to setup enough memory for encrypted/decrypted data, which may contains
> > PKCS#7 padding.
> > 
> > Actually we had a bug in calculating the encrypted data length when the
> > length % 8 == 0, and the case was not covered by the current LayoutTest. bug
> > 207176
> 
> Then maybe you should write a test in that patch to help you validate your
> implementation instead of adding new tests like these here.

Sure, another option was adding these test cases in bug 207176.
If it's better option than making another patch, then I can move the test case to bug 207176.

The reason why I made a separate bug is that attachment 389613 affects the port, but bug 207176 only for OpenSSL backend one.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.webkit.org/pipermail/webkit-unassigned/attachments/20200207/7ae5f045/attachment-0001.htm>