LayoutTests/crypto/subtle/hkdf-deriveBits.html - Issue 822083003: Webcrypto: add layout tests for HKDF algorithm

Side by Side Diff: LayoutTests/crypto/subtle/hkdf-deriveBits.html

Issue 822083003: Webcrypto: add layout tests for HKDF algorithm (Closed) Base URL: https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/blink.git@master

Patch Set: Created 5 years, 11 months ago

Use n/p to move between diff chunks; N/P to move between comments. Draft comments are only viewable by you.

Jump to:

View unified diff | Download patch

« LayoutTests/crypto/subtle/derive-hkdf-keys.html ('K') | « LayoutTests/crypto/subtle/derive-hkdf-keys-expected.txt ('k') | LayoutTests/crypto/subtle/hkdf-deriveBits-expected.txt » ('j') | LayoutTests/crypto/subtle/hkdf-deriveBits-test-vectors.html » ('J')
Toggle Intra-line Diffs ('i') | Expand Comments ('e') | Collapse Comments ('c') | Hide Comments ('s')

OLD	NEW
(Empty)
	1 <!DOCTYPE html>

	2 <html>

	3 <head>

	4 <script src="../../resources/js-test.js"></script>

	5 <script src="resources/common.js"></script>

	6 </head>

	7 <body>

	8 <p id="description"></p>

	9 <div id="console"></div>

	10

	11 <script>

	12 description("Test that HKDF does not support methods it should not support.");

	13

	14 jsTestIsAsync = true;

	15

	16 kHkdfKey = "0b0b0b0b0b0b0b0b0b0b0b0b0b0b0b0b0b0b0b0b0b0b";

	17

	18 kHkdfAlgorithm = {

	19 name: "HKDF",

	20 hash: "SHA-256",

	21 salt: new Uint8Array(),

	22 info: new Uint8Array()

	23 };

	24

	25 var extractable = true;

	26 Promise.resolve(null).then(function(result) {

	27 // Set up the test by creating an HKDF key.

	28 return crypto.subtle.importKey("raw", hexStringToUint8Array(kHkdfKey), {name : "HKDF"}, extractable, ['deriveKey', 'deriveBits']);

	29 }).then(function(result) {

	30 baseKey = result;

	31

	32 debug("Derive 0 bits from the HKDF key");

	33 return crypto.subtle.deriveBits(kHkdfAlgorithm, baseKey, 0);

	34 }).then(function(result) {

	35 derivedBits = result;

	36

	37 shouldEvaluateAs("derivedBits.byteLength", 0);

	38

	39 debug("Derive 4 bits from the HKDF key");

	40 return crypto.subtle.deriveBits(kHkdfAlgorithm, baseKey, 4);

	41 }).then(function(result) {

	42 derivedBits = new DataView(result);

	43

	44 shouldEvaluateAs("derivedBits.byteLength", 1);

	45 shouldEvaluateAs("derivedBits.getUint8(0) % 16", 0);
	eroman 2015/01/12 22:35:23 Can you do an equality test instead? Should verif Can you do an equality test instead? Should verify that the other bits are correct in the case of deriving partial lengths. In fact, why put this in its own test file? This could just as easily be expressed as another test case in the test-vectors.html. I suggest renaming test-vectors.html to simply deriveBits.html, and exercising the 0 length derivation, and non-multiple of 8 derivation in there. nharper 2015/01/13 00:11:16 shouldEvaluateAs changed to shouldBe. I have test Show quoted text On 2015/01/12 22:35:23, eroman wrote: > Can you do an equality test instead? > > Should verify that the other bits are correct in the case of deriving partial > lengths. > > In fact, why put this in its own test file? This could just as easily be > expressed as another test case in the test-vectors.html. > > I suggest renaming test-vectors.html to simply deriveBits.html, and exercising > the 0 length derivation, and non-multiple of 8 derivation in there. shouldEvaluateAs changed to shouldBe. I have test-vectors as its own file because all it contains are the test vectors from RFC 5869 (I could rename it rfc-5869-test-vectors). I'd prefer to keep any other tests for deriveBits out of that file. Also, the format of the tests here doesn't match that of the test-vectors - basically all the test vectors test does is check that the output is correct for the given input, while here I'm doing more specific checks (like checking the length of the returned buffer). eroman 2015/01/13 00:45:34 If you keep the file please rename it as you sugge Show quoted text On 2015/01/13 00:11:16, nharper wrote: > On 2015/01/12 22:35:23, eroman wrote: > > Can you do an equality test instead? > > > > Should verify that the other bits are correct in the case of deriving partial > > lengths. > > > > In fact, why put this in its own test file? This could just as easily be > > expressed as another test case in the test-vectors.html. > > > > I suggest renaming test-vectors.html to simply deriveBits.html, and exercising > > the 0 length derivation, and non-multiple of 8 derivation in there. > > shouldEvaluateAs changed to shouldBe. > > I have test-vectors as its own file because all it contains are the test vectors > from RFC 5869 (I could rename it rfc-5869-test-vectors). I'd prefer to keep any If you keep the file please rename it as you suggested, rfc-5879-test-vectors Otherwise with the generic test-vectors name I don't see why we can't put other stuff in it. Show quoted text > other tests for deriveBits out of that file. Also, the format of the tests here > doesn't match that of the test-vectors - basically all the test vectors test > does is check that the output is correct for the given input, while here I'm > doing more specific checks (like checking the length of the returned buffer). These tests aren't any more specific than in the other one. The other one compares the output buffer to a known value, and so is implicitly testing the length as well.
	46

	47 }).then(finishJSTest, failAndFinishJSTest);

	48

	49 </script>

	50

	51 </body>

	52 </html>

OLD	NEW