Replace descriptions with links just to double-check nothing has been
forgotten.
Signed-off-by: Manuel Pégourié-Gonnard <manuel.pegourie-gonnard@arm.com>
- fix inaccuracy about PSA hash implementation
- add note about context-less operations
- provide summary
Signed-off-by: Manuel Pégourié-Gonnard <manuel.pegourie-gonnard@arm.com>
Data gathered with:
for c in server9*.crt; do echo $c; openssl x509 -noout -text -in $c |
grep '^ Signature Algorithm: rsassaPss' -A3 | sed '1d'; done
for c in crl-rsa-pss-*; do echo $c; openssl crl -noout -text -in $c |
grep '^ Signature Algorithm: rsassaPss' -A3 | sed '1d'; done
for c in server9.req.*; do echo $c; openssl req -noout -text -in $c |
grep '^ Signature Algorithm: rsassaPss' -A3 | sed '1d'; done
Unfortunately there is no record of how these files have been generated.
Signed-off-by: Manuel Pégourié-Gonnard <manuel.pegourie-gonnard@arm.com>
Work in progress, some tasks have very explicit definitions and details
on how to execute, others much less so; some may need splitting.
These documents are temporary anyway, to give a rough idea of the work
remaining to reach those goals (both of which we started, but only for
some use case so far). Ultimately the result will be actionable and
estimated tasks on github.
Signed-off-by: Manuel Pégourié-Gonnard <manuel.pegourie-gonnard@arm.com>
Note: removed `mbedtls_x509write_crt_set_subject_key()` from the list of
things that should be tested, as it's taking public key rather than a
keypair.
Signed-off-by: Manuel Pégourié-Gonnard <manuel.pegourie-gonnard@arm.com>
This is an updated version of the study that was done a few years ago.
The script `syms` was used to list symbols form libmbedtls.a /
libmbedx509.a that are defined externally. It was run with config.py
full minus MBEDTLS_USE_PSA_CRYPTO minus
MBEDTLS_SSL_PROTO_TLS1_3_EXPERIMENTAL.
Signed-off-by: Manuel Pégourié-Gonnard <manuel.pegourie-gonnard@arm.com>
Don't mention "TLS 1.2 only" for PSK, as that could give the impression
that the other things about TLS are supported beyond 1.2, which isn't
the case currently.
Signed-off-by: Manuel Pégourié-Gonnard <manuel.pegourie-gonnard@arm.com>
The section is about things that are not covered, but some lists are
about things that are covered, which was very confusing.
Signed-off-by: Manuel Pégourié-Gonnard <manuel.pegourie-gonnard@arm.com>
Also, remove the section about design considerations for now. It's
probably more suitable for a developer-oriented document that would also
include considerations about possible paths for the future, which would
better be separated from user documentation (separating the certain that
is now, from the uncertain that might or might not be later).
Signed-off-by: Manuel Pégourié-Gonnard <manuel.pegourie-gonnard@arm.com>
What matters is that we validate that test data is not removed. Keeping the
test data is the most obvious way, but not the only way.
Signed-off-by: Gilles Peskine <Gilles.Peskine@arm.com>
The import-and-save and load-and-check parts of the tests don't have to be
actually the same test cases.
Introduce the terms “forward compatibility” and “backward compatibility” and
relate them to import-and-save and load-and-check actions.
These are clarifications of intent that do not represent an intended change
in the strategy or intended coverage.
Signed-off-by: Gilles Peskine <Gilles.Peskine@arm.com>
