path: root/src/util/test_crypto_ecdsa.c
AgeCommit message (Collapse)Author
2020-05-26add additional test condition for GNS cryptoFlorian Dold
2020-04-11fixing #6149Christian Grothoff
2020-04-08fix sign api for to address #6164Christian Grothoff
2019-10-31tighten formatting rulesChristian Grothoff
2019-10-05global reindent, now with uncrustify hook enabledChristian Grothoff
2019-09-08uncrustify as demanded.ng0
2019-09-06first step to remove plibcng0
2019-01-14src: for every AGPL3.0 file, add SPDX identifier.ng0
2018-06-07paragraph for gnunet devs that don't know how to use the webpsyc://loupsycedyglgamf.onion/~lynX
2018-06-07glitch in the license text detected by hyazinthe, thank you!psyc://loupsycedyglgamf.onion/~lynX
2018-06-05first batch of license fixes (boring)psyc://loupsycedyglgamf.onion/~lynX
2016-01-19-fix (C) noticesChristian Grothoff
2015-06-30fix #3869: outdated FSF addressChristian Grothoff
2015-02-07-bringing copyright tags up to FSF standardChristian Grothoff
2013-11-05Werner Koch wrote:Christian Grothoff
Hi, find attached a changed diff to crypto_ecc.c with the final Libgcrypt interface. Use commit b9fd398 or later for your tests. Shalom-Salam, Werner
2013-11-05Werner Koch wrote:Christian Grothoff
Hi, find attach the patch which makes all 3 test cases work with Ed25519. There are some minor hacks in the test cases to allow enabling of Libgcrypt debugging and also some minor output style changes. There is one FIXME in the code: /* FIXME: mpi_print creates an unsigned integer - is that intended or should we convert it to a signed integer (2-compl)? */ mpi_print (xbuf, sizeof (xbuf), result_x); X may be positive or negative but GCRYMPI_FMT_USG ignores the sign. Thus this is not what we actually want. Should we change it to 2-comp (GCRYMPI_FMT_STD) so that we have a proper value? Given that the curve is 255 bit this should alwas fit int the 256 bit buffer. Another option would be to use the EdDSA method for the sign but that is optimized to easily recover x and would be more work. Or we store the sign in the high bit. t all depends on what you want to write into the protocol specs. I would also like to revert the way we distinguish between Ed25519 with and without ECDSA: The way we do it right now is by assuming the Ed25519 is always used with EdDSA unless a flag has been set. This is a bit surprising and requiring the "(flags eddsa)" would be a less surprising interface. Salam-Shalom, Werner
2013-10-10-updated testsChristian Grothoff