Summary: | Support exporting private WebCrypto RSA keys | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Product: | WebKit | Reporter: | Alexey Proskuryakov <ap> | ||||
Component: | WebCore Misc. | Assignee: | Alexey Proskuryakov <ap> | ||||
Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | ||||||
Severity: | Normal | CC: | andersca, commit-queue | ||||
Priority: | P2 | ||||||
Version: | 528+ (Nightly build) | ||||||
Hardware: | Unspecified | ||||||
OS: | Unspecified | ||||||
Bug Depends on: | |||||||
Bug Blocks: | 122679 | ||||||
Attachments: |
|
Description
Alexey Proskuryakov
2013-11-18 00:43:33 PST
Created attachment 218322 [details]
proposed patch
Comment on attachment 218322 [details] proposed patch View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=218322&action=review > Source/WebCore/crypto/CommonCryptoUtilities.cpp:82 > + RELEASE_ASSERT(!status); I’d rather assert status == kCCSuccess here (and all the other places). Attachment 218322 [details] did not pass style-queue:
Failed to run "['Tools/Scripts/check-webkit-style', '--diff-files', u'LayoutTests/ChangeLog', u'LayoutTests/crypto/subtle/rsa-export-private-key-expected.txt', u'LayoutTests/crypto/subtle/rsa-export-private-key.html', u'Source/WebCore/ChangeLog', u'Source/WebCore/crypto/CommonCryptoUtilities.cpp', u'Source/WebCore/crypto/CommonCryptoUtilities.h', u'Source/WebCore/crypto/mac/CryptoKeyRSAMac.cpp']" exit_code: 1
ERROR: Source/WebCore/crypto/CommonCryptoUtilities.cpp:32: Missing spaces around / [whitespace/operators] [3]
ERROR: Source/WebCore/crypto/CommonCryptoUtilities.h:100: Missing spaces around && [whitespace/operators] [3]
ERROR: Source/WebCore/crypto/CommonCryptoUtilities.h:102: Missing spaces around && [whitespace/operators] [3]
Total errors found: 3 in 7 files
If any of these errors are false positives, please file a bug against check-webkit-style.
Committed <http://trac.webkit.org/r160029>. > I’d rather assert status == kCCSuccess here (and all the other places).
These pretty much only fail on out of memory conditions, which is normally a release assert for us.
Or did you mean a RELEASE_ASSERT in a different form? I personally prefer "status == kCCSuccess" too, but I don't think we ever do that for other types. (In reply to comment #6) > Or did you mean a RELEASE_ASSERT in a different form? I personally prefer "status == kCCSuccess" too, but I don't think we ever do that for other types. I mean i like the condition to be (status == kCCSuccess) as opposed to (!status) since it’s not clear (to me anyway) that kCCSuccess is 0. |