Am Freitag, den 11.12.2020, 14:30 +0800 schrieb Meng Yu:
>
> +/* curve25519 */
> +static u64 curve25519_g_x[] = { 0x0000000000000009, 0x0000000000000000,
> + 0x0000000000000000, 0x0000000000000000 };
> +static u64 curve25519_p[] = { 0xffffffffffffffed, 0xffffffffffffffff,
> + 0xffffffffffffffff, 0x7fffffffffffffff };
> +static u64 curve25519_a[] = { 0x000000000001DB41, 0x0000000000000000,
> + 0x0000000000000000, 0x0000000000000000 };
> +static const struct ecc_curve ecc_25519 = {
> + .name = "curve25519",
> + .g = {
> + .x = curve25519_g_x,
> + .ndigits = 4,
> + },
> + .p = curve25519_p,
> + .a = curve25519_a,
> +};
With this definition, I am not sure whether ecc_is_pubkey_valid_partial would
work correctly. At least it *seems* that there would be a NULL-pointer
dereference in vli_add with the undefined .b value. Did you test and can you
confirm?
Thanks
Stephan
