-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 704
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Refactor fe_isnonzero to fe_isnonzero_vartime #1893
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
Signed-off-by: tison <wander4096@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: tison <wander4096@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: tison <wander4096@gmail.com>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks for tackling this.
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #1893 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 96.29% 96.30%
=======================================
Files 135 135
Lines 20663 20667 +4
Branches 226 228 +2
=======================================
+ Hits 19898 19903 +5
Misses 730 730
+ Partials 35 34 -1 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
Thanks for your review @briansmith! Do you think it's better to exclude changes around |
Yes, I think we should limit this to the curve25519.c change and mem.h deletion. |
Signed-off-by: tison <wander4096@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: tison <wander4096@gmail.com>
Updated. PTAL @briansmith. |
@briansmith ping as a reminder :D |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I noticed that the code coverage for has missing coverage for one of the calls. I am investigating that.
Signed-off-by: tison <wander4096@gmail.com>
@briansmith ping as a reminder :D |
@briansmith I suppose the codecov regression is false positive.. |
@briansmith is there other blocker to this PR? |
This refers to #1827.
An intuitive solution according to @briansmith's comment. But I know little about crypto so perhaps some invariants are broken.