-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1
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
add FromStr representations of kdf, kem, and aead #40
Changes from 1 commit
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -1,9 +1,10 @@ | ||
use crate::{IdLookupError, Keypair}; | ||
use num_enum::TryFromPrimitive; | ||
use std::str::FromStr; | ||
|
||
#[cfg(target_arch = "wasm32")] | ||
use wasm_bindgen::prelude::*; | ||
|
||
use crate::Keypair; | ||
use num_enum::TryFromPrimitive; | ||
|
||
/** | ||
Kem represents an asymmetric key encapsulation mechanism, as per | ||
[RFC9180§7.1][section-7.1]. Currently only two of options listed in | ||
|
@@ -31,6 +32,24 @@ pub enum Kem { | |
X25519HkdfSha256 = 32, | ||
} | ||
|
||
impl FromStr for Kem { | ||
type Err = IdLookupError; | ||
|
||
fn from_str(s: &str) -> Result<Self, Self::Err> { | ||
match &*s.to_lowercase() { | ||
#[cfg(feature = "kem-dh-p256-hkdf-sha256")] | ||
"dhp256hkdfsha256" | "dh-p256-hkdf-sha256" | "dhkem(p-256, hkdf-sha256)" => { | ||
Ok(Self::DhP256HkdfSha256) | ||
} | ||
#[cfg(feature = "kem-x25519-hkdf-sha256")] | ||
"x25519hkdfsha256" | "x25519-hkdf-sha256" | "dhkem(x25519, hkdf-sha256)" => { | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. nit: the shorter nicknames for this and the P-256-based KEM are inconsistent on whether they include "dh-" There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. What's your suggested resolution to this? There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I'd recommend dropping "dh" from "dhp256hkdfsha256". (I think it would be unusual to abbreviate DHKEM to DH, and more natural to omit the DHKEM part altogether) There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I wonder if it's worth raising this with the backing crate as well. I just cargo-culted the naming from There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. addressed in eab5053 — i also added versions that don't label the kdf, so |
||
Ok(Self::X25519HkdfSha256) | ||
} | ||
_ => Err(IdLookupError("kem not recognized")), | ||
} | ||
} | ||
} | ||
|
||
impl Kem { | ||
/// generate a [`Keypair`] for this [`Config`] or [`Kem`]. | ||
#[must_use] | ||
|
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.
We may want to include the "HKDF-" prefix in these identifiers for completeness and future-proofing. See RFC9180, Table 3.
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.
added a second commit (869c6d8) that handles
hkdf-sha256
andHkdfSha256
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.
Should we require the prefix?
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 think accepting either is probably fine.