Right, I recall reviewing this and made some comments. Will take a look
at the updated webrev.
Thanks,
Valerie
On 3/17/2020 4:48 PM, Jamil Nimeh wrote:
Hello all,
I'm finally getting back around to this after dusting off the cobwebs.
Webrev: https://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jnimeh/reviews/8076999/webrev.03
Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8076999
Valerie, you had some comments from way back (7/9/2019). Just a short
summary of what's been done to address them:
* Removed unused imports
* Added a default "PBES2" string value for when the toString method
is called on a PBES2Parameters object before the init() method.
* Tested encoding of PBKDF2 parameters AlgorithmIdentifiers with the
optional parameters field not present (as opposed to an ASN.1
NULL). OpenSSL seems happy with it so that's how we'll encode those.
* Switched order on the IV and keysize parsing for RC2 parameters
* Using KEYLEN_ANY (changed to KEYLEN_UNSPEC) now in lieu of -1 in
the conditionals you cited.
* For algorithms where the key length is implicit either due to the
algorithm or the specific OID, we no longer assert the key length
in the KDF parameters. This is consistent with other
implementations such as OpenSSL.
* Regarding the comment from the parsing in engineInit(byte[])
"By calling data.getDerValue(), we are essentially peeling one layer
off, right? If you still agree with me at this point, then note that
pBES2_params is a local variable and its value should be the same
unless explicitly re-assigned (as on line 413). Thus, per my reading
of the code, the tag that you are checking on line 419 is not the one
for encryption scheme, but rather the outer sequence tag encapsulating
kdf and encryption scheme. Its current location is very misleading
though, in between kdf and encryption scheme. To really check the tag
for kdf and encryption scheme, the tag checking should be in
parseKDF(...) and parseES(...) against the DerValue argument."
I did add a DerValue check in parseKDF because it is appropriate as
you stated. I also removed the check from line 419 in the old
webrev. With the new code that check is redundant as we are using
AlgorithmId.parse() now as the initial operation in parseES, which in
turn does the sequence tag check for us.
The check itself on 419 though is testing the ASN.1 tag for the
Encryption scheme, not the higher level sequence for PBES2-params.
Otherwise neither the KDF nor the encryption scheme would parse
properly and none of the tests would pass.
With this new code, parseKDF and parseES are testing the outer
SEQUENCE tags for each of the AlgorithmIdentifier objects described by
keyDerivationFunc and encryptionScheme per RFC 8018.
* keysize setting: This one is a bit tricky because key size is
specified in multiple ways. The basic flow is this. Key size
will start as KEYLEN_UNSPEC. If it is at any point specified,
either via the constructor, by KDF params, or by enc params then
that is the value that is set. At near the end of parsing a
validation of the encryption parameters occurs and at that point
the key length is checked against the algorithm. If it is an alg
that uses a fixed value then keysize has to be consistent with
it. If it is variable length and it is still KEYSIZE_UNSPEC that
is also a failure (since something needs to be specified to
distinguish RC2_40 from RC2_128, for example).
o This approach seems to work and catches the issue you found
where certain DER encodings could yield things like
PBEWithHmacSHA256AndRC5_-1.
* Added some new tests to handle the changes listed above.
I'll be updating the CSR shortly to reflect comments there and I'll
send a separate review notice for that.
Thanks,
--Jamil
