otherPrimeInfos is not optional in version 1 RSAPrivateKeys.

Currently, we correctly refuse to parse version 0 multi-prime keys, but we
still parse version 1 two-prime keys. Both should be rejected.

I missed an additional clause in the spec originally. It seems otherPrimeInfos
is marked OPTIONAL not because it is actually optional, but because they wanted
the two RSAPrivateKey forms to share one definition. The prose rules following
the definition imply that otherPrimeInfos' presence is entirely determined by
the version:

    * version is the version number, for compatibility with future
      revisions of this document.  It shall be 0 for this version of the
      document, unless multi-prime is used, in which case it shall be 1.

            Version ::= INTEGER { two-prime(0), multi(1) }
               (CONSTRAINED BY
               {-- version must be multi if otherPrimeInfos present --})

and:

    * otherPrimeInfos contains the information for the additional primes
      r_3, ..., r_u, in order.  It shall be omitted if version is 0 and
      shall contain at least one instance of OtherPrimeInfo if version
      is 1.

Change-Id: I458232a2e20ed68fddcc39c4c45333f33441f70b
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/7143
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
1 file changed
tree: 318146c1269afc422f791d6b4d3590f0d8636966
  1. .clang-format
  2. .gitignore
  3. BUILDING.md
  4. CMakeLists.txt
  5. CONTRIBUTING.md
  6. FUZZING.md
  7. LICENSE
  8. PORTING.md
  9. README.md
  10. STYLE.md
  11. codereview.settings
  12. crypto/
  13. decrepit/
  14. fuzz/
  15. include/
  16. ssl/
  17. tool/
  18. util/
README.md

BoringSSL

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.

There are other files in this directory which might be helpful: