|author||David Benjamin <email@example.com>||Wed Dec 30 21:40:40 2015 -0500|
|committer||Adam Langley <firstname.lastname@example.org>||Wed Feb 17 16:28:07 2016 +0000|
Implement new SPKI parsers. Many consumers need SPKI support (X.509, TLS, QUIC, WebCrypto), each with different ways to set signature parameters. SPKIs themselves can get complex with id-RSASSA-PSS keys which come with various constraints in the key parameters. This suggests we want a common in-library representation of an SPKI. This adds two new functions EVP_parse_public_key and EVP_marshal_public_key which converts EVP_PKEY to and from SPKI and implements X509_PUBKEY functions with them. EVP_PKEY seems to have been intended to be able to express the supported SPKI types with full-fidelity, so these APIs will continue this. This means future support for id-RSASSA-PSS would *not* repurpose EVP_PKEY_RSA. I'm worried about code assuming EVP_PKEY_RSA implies acting on the RSA* is legal. Instead, it'd add an EVP_PKEY_RSA_PSS and the data pointer would be some (exposed, so the caller may still check key size, etc.) RSA_PSS_KEY struct. Internally, the EVP_PKEY_CTX implementation would enforce the key constraints. If RSA_PSS_KEY would later need its own API, that code would move there, but that seems unlikely. Ideally we'd have a 1:1 correspondence with key OID, although we may have to fudge things if mistakes happen in standardization. (Whether or not X.509 reuses id-ecPublicKey for Ed25519, we'll give it a separate EVP_PKEY type.) DSA parsing hooks are still implemented, missing parameters and all for now. This isn't any worse than before. Decoupling from the giant crypto/obj OID table will be a later task. BUG=522228 Change-Id: I0e3964edf20cb795a18b0991d17e5ca8bce3e28c Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/6861 Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <email@example.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.
There are other files in this directory which might be helpful: