Address a FIXME.

Address a FIXME.

Return the correct error type (OperationError) when AES-GCM tag length is not one enumerated by the spec.

Committed: https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/blink?view=rev&revision=186970

[eroman, 2014-12-10 23:51:40]

eroman@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ jww@chromium.org

[jww, 2014-12-11 03:42:21]

lgtm, with minor nit.

https://codereview.chromium.org/790373002/diff/1/LayoutTests/crypto/aes-gcm-p...
File LayoutTests/crypto/aes-gcm-parseAlgorithm-failures.html (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/790373002/diff/1/LayoutTests/crypto/aes-gcm-p...
LayoutTests/crypto/aes-gcm-parseAlgorithm-failures.html:70: debug('\nencrypt()
with tagLength that is 130...');
Is it worth throwing in a negative value test, just for completeness?

[eroman, 2014-12-11 03:44:13]

https://codereview.chromium.org/790373002/diff/1/LayoutTests/crypto/aes-gcm-p...
File LayoutTests/crypto/aes-gcm-parseAlgorithm-failures.html (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/790373002/diff/1/LayoutTests/crypto/aes-gcm-p...
LayoutTests/crypto/aes-gcm-parseAlgorithm-failures.html:70: debug('\nencrypt()
with tagLength that is 130...');
On 2014/12/11 03:42:20, jww wrote:
> Is it worth throwing in a negative value test, just for completeness?

There is already a test for -1 on line 55, do you consider that sufficient?

If not I can add a few more negative numbers.

[jww, 2014-12-11 05:31:34]

On 2014/12/11 03:44:13, eroman wrote:
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/790373002/diff/1/LayoutTests/crypto/aes-gcm-p...
> File LayoutTests/crypto/aes-gcm-parseAlgorithm-failures.html (right):
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/790373002/diff/1/LayoutTests/crypto/aes-gcm-p...
> LayoutTests/crypto/aes-gcm-parseAlgorithm-failures.html:70: debug('\nencrypt()
> with tagLength that is 130...');
> On 2014/12/11 03:42:20, jww wrote:
> > Is it worth throwing in a negative value test, just for completeness?
> 
> There is already a test for -1 on line 55, do you consider that sufficient?
> 
> If not I can add a few more negative numbers.

That's fine; I just had missed it.

[eroman, 2014-12-11 06:16:42]

The CQ bit was checked by eroman@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-12-11 06:18:07]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/790373002/1

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-12-11 08:05:55]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-12-11 08:05:56]

Try jobs failed on following builders:
  win_blink_rel on tryserver.blink
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.blink/builders/win_blink_rel/builds/40840)

[eroman, 2014-12-11 16:23:06]

The CQ bit was checked by eroman@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-12-11 16:23:40]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/790373002/1

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-12-11 16:50:00]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-12-11 16:50:01]

Try jobs failed on following builders:
  android_blink_compile_dbg on tryserver.blink
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.blink/builders/android_blink_compile_db...)
  android_blink_compile_rel on tryserver.blink
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.blink/builders/android_blink_compile_re...)

[eroman, 2014-12-11 17:16:19]

The CQ bit was checked by eroman@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-12-11 17:16:39]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/790373002/20001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-12-11 18:34:38]

Committed patchset #2 (id:20001) as
https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/blink?view=rev&revision=186970