Add asymmetric encryption support to TPM provider #225
Conversation
ionut-arm
force-pushed
the
tpm-async-enc
branch
from
94a11db
to
766c48c
Compare
| // Test is ignored as TPMs do not support labels that don't end in a 0 byte | ||
| // A resolution for this has not been reached yet, so keeping as is | ||
| // See: https://github.com/parallaxsecond/parsec/issues/217 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We could also add a 0 at the end of the salt just to make the test pass on all providers?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The one that does asym encrypt and decrypt with Parsec would work, but the other one won't unless we build a &str label that ends with a 0 byte UTF-8 character (I actually tried that, it worked). Don't know which path is better, whether they should be ignored or not, @paulhowardarm was saying that we should have some tests that prove the problem and they should be disabled for now.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
ah I see. I was thinking it would be nice to have some tests activated (even if TPM specific) to make sure that it is working end-to-end.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'll add an integration test just for that (the kind that only use the provider, not the whole service)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm adding an integration test but I'll raise an issue to refactor those integration tests into the e2e_tests, think I have an easy way of doing it.
This commit adds support for asymmetric encryption to the TPM provider. Signed-off-by: Ionut Mihalcea <[email protected]>
ionut-arm
force-pushed
the
tpm-async-enc
branch
from
766c48c
to
975cae2
Compare
| rsa = "0.3.0" | ||
| rand = "0.7.3" | ||
| sha2 = "0.9.1" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We should probably add that in a future PR to the README.md
This commit adds support for asymmetric encryption to the TPM provider.
Signed-off-by: Ionut Mihalcea [email protected]
Implements #217