On Mon, Mar 18, 2024 at 10:25:26PM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > On Tue Mar 12, 2024 at 8:36 PM EET, Stefan Berger wrote: > > From: Stefan Berger <stefanb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > In preparation for support of NIST P521, adjust the basic tests on the > > length of the provided key parameters to only ensure that the length of the > > x plus y coordinates parameter array is not an odd number and that each > > coordinate fits into an array of 'ndigits' digits. Mathematical tests on > > the key's parameters are then done in ecc_is_pubkey_valid_full rejecting > > invalid keys. > > > > The change is necessary since NIST P521 keys do not have keys with > > coordinates that each fully require 'full' digits (= u64), unlike > > NIST P192/256/384 that all require multiple 'full' digits. > > This sentence is not really comprehendable English sentence. Can you > just write the rationale in understandable form? > > "fully require full digits (= u64)" is something totally alien to me > tbh. It is proper English, but requires an understanding of how large integers are handled by crypto/ecdsa.c: They're a sequence of u64. For P192, P256 and P384 all u64 in the sequence are used to their full extent because the key size is divisable by 64. That's not the case for P521, where the most significant u64 is not fully used (only 2 out of 8 bytes are used). Thanks, Lukas
