Closed quanvincss closed 1 year ago
I can not reproduce this issue. I am getting consistent 64byte signature output
@quanvincss since the change in #8, try reeseeding DB, and running tests again.
I can not reproduce this issue. I am getting consistent 64byte signature output
Even if I do reseeding the DB, or I can't reproduce this issue "several" times, the issue still exists, with the big length of r
and s
, you may need to try thousands of times or even more to see. But it is possible to check and add 0 padding to r
and s
to their maximum size
https://github.com/fido-alliance/fdo-fido-conformance-server/blob/62b74d9157cc270af551e779310f92c9eb70626c/core/shared/signing.crypto.go#L247
I will add additional check when generating r/s
On Mon, 2 Oct 2023 at 5:58 PM, quanvincss @.***> wrote:
I can not reproduce this issue. I am getting consistent 64byte signature output
Even if I do reseeding the DB, or I can't reproduce this issue "several" times, the issue still exists, with the big length of r and s, you may need to try thousands of times or even more to see. But it is possible to check and add 0 padding to r and s to their maximum size
— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/fido-alliance/fdo-fido-conformance-server/issues/44#issuecomment-1742400933, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAMPOFGWBPN4QCCEJ6QKNGLX5JCXBANCNFSM6AAAAAA5HMFJEI . You are receiving this because you were assigned.Message ID: @.*** com>
I ran over 100,000 runs. All signatures validate, and no issues with the size no more!
ECDSA can be weird...
Nice!
To simplify issue resolution process, please provide network logs, and or test voucher. f1d0fd00eb104ea5b97286286aefac1b.voucher.txt
What part of the spec are you testing?
What protocol are having issue with?
Issue description
/api/dot/vouchers/{uuid}
.r
ands
with equal length or there is no clue to determine which part has a longer length.