Re: [PATCH v3 03/10] KEYS: X.509: Parse Basic Constraints for CA

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




> On Jan 4, 2023, at 5:29 AM, Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 06:10:04AM -0500, Mimi Zohar wrote:
>>> diff --git a/crypto/asymmetric_keys/x509_parser.h b/crypto/asymmetric_keys/x509_parser.h
>>> index a299c9c56f40..7c5c0ad1c22e 100644
>>> --- a/crypto/asymmetric_keys/x509_parser.h
>>> +++ b/crypto/asymmetric_keys/x509_parser.h
>>> @@ -38,6 +38,7 @@ struct x509_certificate {
>>> 	bool		self_signed;		/* T if self-signed (check unsupported_sig too) */
>>> 	bool		unsupported_sig;	/* T if signature uses unsupported crypto */
>>> 	bool		blacklisted;
>>> +	bool		root_ca;		/* T if basic constraints CA is set */
>>> }; 
>> 
>> The variable "root_ca" should probably be renamed to just "ca", right?
> 
> Perhaps is_ca?

I am open to renaming this, but need an agreement on whether the “is_” should be used or not:

https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/b28ea211d88e968a5487b20477236e9b507755f4.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx/





[Index of Archives]     [Kernel]     [Gnu Classpath]     [Gnu Crypto]     [DM Crypt]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]
  Powered by Linux