On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 6:03 PM Mimi Zohar <zohar@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2019-06-26 at 17:42 +0300, Dmitry Kasatkin wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 5:56 AM Mimi Zohar <zohar@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, 2019-06-24 at 23:11 +0300, Vitaly Chikunov wrote:
> > > > Mimi,
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 03:47:27PM -0400, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> > > > > On Mon, 2019-06-24 at 22:23 +0300, Vitaly Chikunov wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > With and without this change, the sha family is working properly, but
> > > > > > > > with this patch set, I'm now seeing "sign_hash_v2: signing failed:
> > > > > > > > (invalid digest)" for gost/streebog. Previously it worked.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If it worked before this is strange. It should not. What patchset
> > > > > > version it was?
> > > > >
> > > > > No, I'm saying that I built both openssl and the gost engine a while
> > > > > ago. There's been some gost engine updates since then, which are
> > > > > dependent on a newer version of openssl. So I'll need to rebuild both
> > > > > openssl and the gost engine in order to re-test.
> > > >
> > > > Hm. I don't see a difference in signing code.
> > > >
> > > > Only the difference is there was no `log_err("sign_hash_v2: signing
> > > > failed: (%s)\n", ...)` about singing failure, because, I thought, the
> > > > caller would report it anyway, because of `return -1`.
> > >
> > > Thanks, Vitaly, for all your help. It's now working properly.
> > >
> > > Mimi
> > >
> >
> > I tested various generation and verification options and also backward
> > and forward compatibility.
> > Everything was fine for me....
>
> Thanks! Did you review the code as well? Can I take this as a
> Reviewed-by or an Acked?
>
> Mimi
>
Hello,
Yes, I reviewed as well.
Looks fine for me...
I have one minor spotted from diff, I can reply in other email...
It can be updated later..
You can put "Acked"
Dmitry
--
Thanks,
Dmitry
