| commit | 421f17716086310306920a5e599ed2e68d511243 | [log] [tgz] |
|---|---|---|
| author | David Benjamin <davidben@google.com> | Wed Aug 27 22:10:46 2025 -0400 |
| committer | Boringssl LUCI CQ <boringssl-scoped@luci-project-accounts.iam.gserviceaccount.com> | Wed Sep 03 21:29:19 2025 -0700 |
| tree | 7e67b60afc83e4def21a246b22c96b174be7b88d | |
| parent | a79eeb4d4fd60e5593e3540a0a4a0f6be83c1497 [diff] |
Parse X509_ALGOR without depending on the templates We do still need to give X509_ALGOR an ASN1_ITEM, both because the containing types have not been migrated, and because there are external callers that use <openssl/asn1t.h> and embed X509_ALGOR. https://crbug.com/42290417#comment2 has a list of those. This is a bit more boilerplate than I'd like. Some comes from just needing to define a bunch of functions. Some comes from not being able to use C++ ctors and dtors, which is a bit hard to avoid because X509_ALGOR is actually a public struct. Some is because defining an ASN1_ITEM involves a bit of code. I've hidden that last one behind a macro. (In the long run, I'd like to make the ASN1_ITEM callbacks CBS/CBB-based, but that's a bit tied up with rewriting tasn_enc.cc and tasn_dec.cc, which is in turn tied up with the X509_NAME parse callback, which depends on ASN1_item_ex_d2i and ASN1_item_ex_i2d.) Bug: 42290417 Change-Id: Ib0bfc9c942aa6bf784cf15af6b3747c9fc9a88f5 Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/81777 Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com> Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
BoringSSL is a fork of OpenSSL that is designed to meet Google's needs.
Although BoringSSL is an open source project, it is not intended for general use, as OpenSSL is. We don't recommend that third parties depend upon it. Doing so is likely to be frustrating because there are no guarantees of API or ABI stability.
Programs ship their own copies of BoringSSL when they use it and we update everything as needed when deciding to make API changes. This allows us to mostly avoid compromises in the name of compatibility. It works for us, but it may not work for you.
BoringSSL arose because Google used OpenSSL for many years in various ways and, over time, built up a large number of patches that were maintained while tracking upstream OpenSSL. As Google's product portfolio became more complex, more copies of OpenSSL sprung up and the effort involved in maintaining all these patches in multiple places was growing steadily.
Currently BoringSSL is the SSL library in Chrome/Chromium, Android (but it's not part of the NDK) and a number of other apps/programs.
Project links:
To file a security issue, use the Chromium process and mention in the report this is for BoringSSL. You can ignore the parts of the process that are specific to Chromium/Chrome.
There are other files in this directory which might be helpful: