cros: Create cryptohome keys for Easy sign-in.

chrome/browser/chromeos/login/easy_unlock/easy_unlock_key_manager.cc

Index: chrome/browser/chromeos/login/easy_unlock/easy_unlock_key_manager.cc
diff --git a/chrome/browser/chromeos/login/easy_unlock/easy_unlock_key_manager.cc b/chrome/browser/chromeos/login/easy_unlock/easy_unlock_key_manager.cc
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..3cc4d93f4f060790f072bb0dc0ccdbe3ec1d935c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/chrome/browser/chromeos/login/easy_unlock/easy_unlock_key_manager.cc
@@ -0,0 +1,188 @@
+// Copyright 2014 The Chromium Authors. All rights reserved.
+// Use of this source code is governed by a BSD-style license that can be
+// found in the LICENSE file.
+
+#include "chrome/browser/chromeos/login/easy_unlock/easy_unlock_key_manager.h"
+
+#include "base/bind.h"
+#include "base/logging.h"
+#include "base/strings/stringprintf.h"
+#include "base/values.h"
+
+namespace chromeos {
+
+namespace {
+
+const char kKeyBluetoothAddress[] = "bluetoothAddress";
+const char kKeyPermitRecord[] = "permitRecord";
+const char kKeyId[] = "id";
+const char kKeyPermitId[] = "permitRecord.id";
+const char kKeyPsk[] = "psk";
+
+const char kKeyLabelPrefix[] = "easy-unlock-";
+
+}  // namespace
+
+EasyUnlockKeyManager::EasyUnlockKeyManager() : weak_ptr_factory_(this) {
+}
+
+EasyUnlockKeyManager::~EasyUnlockKeyManager() {
+}
+
+void EasyUnlockKeyManager::CreateKeys(
+    const UserContext& user_context,
+    const base::ListValue& remote_devices,
+    const CreateKeysCallback& callback) {
+  // Must have the secret.
+  DCHECK(!user_context.GetKey()->GetSecret().empty());
+
+  EasyUnlockDeviceKeyDataList devices;
+  if (!RemoteDeviceListToDeviceDataList(remote_devices, &devices)) {

[tbarzic, 2014/09/09 19:32:21]

Should we remove keys even in case the remote_devices is invalid?

[xiyuan, 2014/09/09 20:25:30]

Makes sense. Updated to code to use empty |devices| so that we still nuke all
the keys.

+    LOG(ERROR) << "Error parsing remote device list.";
+    callback.Run(false);
+    return;
+  }
+
+  // Only one pending request.
+  DCHECK(!create_keys_op_);
+  create_keys_op_.reset(new EasyUnlockCreateKeysOperation(

[tbarzic, 2014/09/09 19:32:21]

Would it make sence to do this in OnKeysRemovedForCreateKeys?

[xiyuan, 2014/09/09 20:25:30]

Done.

+      user_context,
+      devices,
+      base::Bind(&EasyUnlockKeyManager::OnKeysCreated,
+                 weak_ptr_factory_.GetWeakPtr(),
+                 callback)));
+
+  // Remove existing keys before creating new ones.
+  RemoveKeys(user_context,
+             base::Bind(&EasyUnlockKeyManager::OnKeysRemovedForCreateKeys,
+                        weak_ptr_factory_.GetWeakPtr(),
+                        callback));
+}
+
+void EasyUnlockKeyManager::RemoveKeys(const UserContext& user_context,
+                                      const RemoveKeysCallback& callback) {
+  // Must have the secret.
+  DCHECK(!user_context.GetKey()->GetSecret().empty());
+  // Only one pending request.
+  DCHECK(!remove_keys_op_);
+
+  remove_keys_op_.reset(
+      new EasyUnlockRemoveKeysOperation(
+          user_context,
+          base::Bind(&EasyUnlockKeyManager::OnKeysRemoved,
+                     weak_ptr_factory_.GetWeakPtr(),
+                     callback)));
+  remove_keys_op_->Start();
+}
+
+void EasyUnlockKeyManager::GetDeviceDataList(
+    const UserContext& user_context,
+    const GetDeviceDataListCallback& callback) {
+  // Only one pending request.
+  DCHECK(!get_keys_op_);
+
+  get_keys_op_.reset(new EasyUnlockGetKeysOperation(
+      user_context,
+      base::Bind(&EasyUnlockKeyManager::OnKeysFetched,
+                 weak_ptr_factory_.GetWeakPtr(),
+                 callback)));
+  get_keys_op_->Start();
+}
+
+// static
+void EasyUnlockKeyManager::DeviceDataToRemoteDeviceDictionary(
+    const EasyUnlockDeviceKeyData& data,
+    base::DictionaryValue* dict) {
+  dict->SetString(kKeyBluetoothAddress, data.bluetooth_address);
+  dict->SetString(kKeyPsk, data.psk);
+  scoped_ptr<base::DictionaryValue> permit_record(new base::DictionaryValue);
+  permit_record->SetString(kKeyId, data.public_key);
+  dict->Set(kKeyPermitRecord, permit_record.release());
+}
+
+// static
+bool EasyUnlockKeyManager::RemoteDeviceDictionaryToDeviceData(
+    const base::DictionaryValue& dict,
+    EasyUnlockDeviceKeyData* data) {
+  return dict.GetString(kKeyBluetoothAddress, &data->bluetooth_address) &&
+      dict.GetString(kKeyPermitId, &data->public_key) &&
+      dict.GetString(kKeyPsk, &data->psk);
+}
+
+// static
+void EasyUnlockKeyManager::DeviceDataListToRemoteDeviceList(
+    const EasyUnlockDeviceKeyDataList& data_list,
+    base::ListValue* device_list) {
+  device_list->Clear();
+  for (size_t i = 0; i < data_list.size(); ++i) {
+    scoped_ptr<base::DictionaryValue> device_dict(new base::DictionaryValue);
+    DeviceDataToRemoteDeviceDictionary(data_list[i], device_dict.get());
+    device_list->Append(device_dict.release());
+  }
+}
+
+// static
+bool EasyUnlockKeyManager::RemoteDeviceListToDeviceDataList(
+    const base::ListValue& device_list,
+    EasyUnlockDeviceKeyDataList* data_list) {
+  EasyUnlockDeviceKeyDataList parsed_devices;
+  for (base::ListValue::const_iterator it = device_list.begin();
+       it != device_list.end();
+       ++it) {
+    const base::DictionaryValue* dict;
+    if (!(*it)->GetAsDictionary(&dict) || !dict)
+      return false;
+
+    EasyUnlockDeviceKeyData data;
+    if (!RemoteDeviceDictionaryToDeviceData(*dict, &data))
+      return false;
+
+    parsed_devices.push_back(data);
+  }
+
+  data_list->swap(parsed_devices);
+  return true;
+}
+
+// static
+std::string EasyUnlockKeyManager::GetKeyLabel(int key_index) {
+  return base::StringPrintf("%s%d", kKeyLabelPrefix, key_index);
+}
+
+void EasyUnlockKeyManager::OnKeysRemovedForCreateKeys(
+    const CreateKeysCallback& callback,
+    bool remove_success) {
+  if (!remove_success) {
+    callback.Run(false);
+    return;
+  }
+
+  // Only one pending request.
+  DCHECK(!create_keys_op_);

[tbarzic, 2014/09/09 19:32:21]

I think you meant DCHECK(create_leys_op_)

[xiyuan, 2014/09/09 20:25:30]

Yep.

+  create_keys_op_->Start();
+}
+
+void EasyUnlockKeyManager::OnKeysCreated(const CreateKeysCallback& callback,
+                                         bool create_success) {
+  scoped_ptr<EasyUnlockCreateKeysOperation> op = create_keys_op_.Pass();
+  if (!callback.is_null())
+    callback.Run(create_success);
+}
+
+void EasyUnlockKeyManager::OnKeysRemoved(const RemoveKeysCallback& callback,
+                                         bool remove_success) {
+  scoped_ptr<EasyUnlockRemoveKeysOperation> op = remove_keys_op_.Pass();
+  if (!callback.is_null())
+    callback.Run(remove_success);
+}
+
+void EasyUnlockKeyManager::OnKeysFetched(
+    const GetDeviceDataListCallback& callback,
+    bool fetch_success,
+    const EasyUnlockDeviceKeyDataList& fetched_data) {
+  scoped_ptr<EasyUnlockGetKeysOperation> op = get_keys_op_.Pass();
+  if (!callback.is_null())
+    callback.Run(fetch_success, fetched_data);
+}
+
+}  // namespace chromeos