Add support for PKCS#11 3.2 validation objects #306
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Jakuje
force-pushed
the
pkcs11-3.2-validation
branch
from
de1c46f to
5ad9e90
Compare
Jakuje
force-pushed
the
pkcs11-3.2-validation
branch
from
5ad9e90 to
abebfe3
Compare
wiktor-k
reviewed
Sep 12, 2025
| // SoftHSM does not support this attribute at all | ||
| assert_eq!(attrs.len(), 0); | ||
| } else { | ||
| // Kryoptic supports the ObjectValidationFlag only if it is built as a FIPS provider |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🤔 is it possible to built it this way for our CI? I think it'd be cool to have some real results here :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sure. But its slow as it builds also the whole OpenSSL :) I was trying this locally and there are some more limitations and corner cases, which do not work or work differently and which we would have to workaround. But with the validation API, it should be quite easy to distinguish the FIPS and non-FIPS kryoptic version.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Added the FIPS build of kryoptic and adjusted the tests to work with it. The build is slow, but after OpenSSL build will be cached, it should be faster (but still slower than other tests).
Jakuje
force-pushed
the
pkcs11-3.2-validation
branch
3 times, most recently
from
c4eba0f to
dce5711
Compare
Jakuje
force-pushed
the
pkcs11-3.2-validation
branch
2 times, most recently
from
0787d51 to
9080717
Compare
Signed-off-by: Jakub Jelen <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jakub Jelen <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jakub Jelen <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jakub Jelen <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jakub Jelen <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jakub Jelen <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jakub Jelen <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jakub Jelen <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jakub Jelen <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jakub Jelen <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jakub Jelen <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jakub Jelen <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jakub Jelen <[email protected]>
Jakuje
force-pushed
the
pkcs11-3.2-validation
branch
from
9080717 to
a5db2de
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The PKCS#11 3.2 introduces a way to query the session for the validation flags of the last operation. This is done with the new API
C_GetSessionValidationFlagswhich is being exposed now also to the users of this crate.It also defines the new attribute specifying if the given object is matching the requirements for the validation.
Last but not least there is new validation object exposing information about the validation itself.
There is currenly almost no coverage for these, as this is implemented only by kryoptic (as far as I know) and not enabled in the default build we are using in CI.
Opening as draft as it depends on some fixes in kryoptic (latchset/kryoptic#315) as well its based on other code changes here (#304).