mirrors-yuzu-emu/mbedtls
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/yuzu-emu/mbedtls synced 2024-11-24 15:38:08 +00:00
Code Issues Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity
mbedtls/tests/suites/test_suite_cipher.chachapoly.data

112 lines
4.4 KiB
Text
Raw Normal View History

Add ChaCha20+Poly1305 to the Cipher module
2016-05-17 23:33:28 +00:00
Decrypt empty buffer
Rename aead_chacha20_poly1305 to chachapoly While the old name is explicit and aligned with the RFC, it's also very long, so with the mbedtls_ prefix prepended we get a 31-char prefix to each identifier, which quickly conflicts with our 80-column policy. The new name is shorter, it's what a lot of people use when speaking about that construction anyway, and hopefully should not introduce confusion at it seems unlikely that variants other than 20/1305 be standardised in the foreseeable future.
2018-05-07 08:43:27 +00:00
depends_on:MBEDTLS_CHACHAPOLY_C:
Add ChaCha20+Poly1305 to the Cipher module
2016-05-17 23:33:28 +00:00
dec_empty_buf:
ChaCha20+Poly1305 Encrypt and decrypt 0 bytes
Rename aead_chacha20_poly1305 to chachapoly While the old name is explicit and aligned with the RFC, it's also very long, so with the mbedtls_ prefix prepended we get a 31-char prefix to each identifier, which quickly conflicts with our 80-column policy. The new name is shorter, it's what a lot of people use when speaking about that construction anyway, and hopefully should not introduce confusion at it seems unlikely that variants other than 20/1305 be standardised in the foreseeable future.
2018-05-07 08:43:27 +00:00
depends_on:MBEDTLS_CHACHAPOLY_C
Add ChaCha20+Poly1305 to the Cipher module
2016-05-17 23:33:28 +00:00
enc_dec_buf:MBEDTLS_CIPHER_CHACHA20_POLY1305:"CHACHA20-POLY1305":256:0:-1
ChaCha20+Poly1305 Encrypt and decrypt 1 bytes
Rename aead_chacha20_poly1305 to chachapoly While the old name is explicit and aligned with the RFC, it's also very long, so with the mbedtls_ prefix prepended we get a 31-char prefix to each identifier, which quickly conflicts with our 80-column policy. The new name is shorter, it's what a lot of people use when speaking about that construction anyway, and hopefully should not introduce confusion at it seems unlikely that variants other than 20/1305 be standardised in the foreseeable future.
2018-05-07 08:43:27 +00:00
depends_on:MBEDTLS_CHACHAPOLY_C
Add ChaCha20+Poly1305 to the Cipher module
2016-05-17 23:33:28 +00:00
enc_dec_buf:MBEDTLS_CIPHER_CHACHA20_POLY1305:"CHACHA20-POLY1305":256:1:-1
ChaCha20+Poly1305 Encrypt and decrypt 2 bytes
Rename aead_chacha20_poly1305 to chachapoly While the old name is explicit and aligned with the RFC, it's also very long, so with the mbedtls_ prefix prepended we get a 31-char prefix to each identifier, which quickly conflicts with our 80-column policy. The new name is shorter, it's what a lot of people use when speaking about that construction anyway, and hopefully should not introduce confusion at it seems unlikely that variants other than 20/1305 be standardised in the foreseeable future.
2018-05-07 08:43:27 +00:00
depends_on:MBEDTLS_CHACHAPOLY_C
Add ChaCha20+Poly1305 to the Cipher module
2016-05-17 23:33:28 +00:00
enc_dec_buf:MBEDTLS_CIPHER_CHACHA20_POLY1305:"CHACHA20-POLY1305":256:2:-1
ChaCha20+Poly1305 Encrypt and decrypt 7 bytes
Rename aead_chacha20_poly1305 to chachapoly While the old name is explicit and aligned with the RFC, it's also very long, so with the mbedtls_ prefix prepended we get a 31-char prefix to each identifier, which quickly conflicts with our 80-column policy. The new name is shorter, it's what a lot of people use when speaking about that construction anyway, and hopefully should not introduce confusion at it seems unlikely that variants other than 20/1305 be standardised in the foreseeable future.
2018-05-07 08:43:27 +00:00
depends_on:MBEDTLS_CHACHAPOLY_C
Add ChaCha20+Poly1305 to the Cipher module
2016-05-17 23:33:28 +00:00
enc_dec_buf:MBEDTLS_CIPHER_CHACHA20_POLY1305:"CHACHA20-POLY1305":256:7:-1
ChaCha20+Poly1305 Encrypt and decrypt 8 bytes
Rename aead_chacha20_poly1305 to chachapoly While the old name is explicit and aligned with the RFC, it's also very long, so with the mbedtls_ prefix prepended we get a 31-char prefix to each identifier, which quickly conflicts with our 80-column policy. The new name is shorter, it's what a lot of people use when speaking about that construction anyway, and hopefully should not introduce confusion at it seems unlikely that variants other than 20/1305 be standardised in the foreseeable future.
2018-05-07 08:43:27 +00:00
depends_on:MBEDTLS_CHACHAPOLY_C
Add ChaCha20+Poly1305 to the Cipher module
2016-05-17 23:33:28 +00:00
enc_dec_buf:MBEDTLS_CIPHER_CHACHA20_POLY1305:"CHACHA20-POLY1305":256:8:-1
ChaCha20+Poly1305 Encrypt and decrypt 9 bytes
Rename aead_chacha20_poly1305 to chachapoly While the old name is explicit and aligned with the RFC, it's also very long, so with the mbedtls_ prefix prepended we get a 31-char prefix to each identifier, which quickly conflicts with our 80-column policy. The new name is shorter, it's what a lot of people use when speaking about that construction anyway, and hopefully should not introduce confusion at it seems unlikely that variants other than 20/1305 be standardised in the foreseeable future.
2018-05-07 08:43:27 +00:00
depends_on:MBEDTLS_CHACHAPOLY_C
Add ChaCha20+Poly1305 to the Cipher module
2016-05-17 23:33:28 +00:00
enc_dec_buf:MBEDTLS_CIPHER_CHACHA20_POLY1305:"CHACHA20-POLY1305":256:9:-1
ChaCha20+Poly1305 Encrypt and decrypt 15 bytes
Rename aead_chacha20_poly1305 to chachapoly While the old name is explicit and aligned with the RFC, it's also very long, so with the mbedtls_ prefix prepended we get a 31-char prefix to each identifier, which quickly conflicts with our 80-column policy. The new name is shorter, it's what a lot of people use when speaking about that construction anyway, and hopefully should not introduce confusion at it seems unlikely that variants other than 20/1305 be standardised in the foreseeable future.
2018-05-07 08:43:27 +00:00
depends_on:MBEDTLS_CHACHAPOLY_C
Add ChaCha20+Poly1305 to the Cipher module
2016-05-17 23:33:28 +00:00
enc_dec_buf:MBEDTLS_CIPHER_CHACHA20_POLY1305:"CHACHA20-POLY1305":256:15:-1
ChaCha20+Poly1305 Encrypt and decrypt 16 bytes
Rename aead_chacha20_poly1305 to chachapoly While the old name is explicit and aligned with the RFC, it's also very long, so with the mbedtls_ prefix prepended we get a 31-char prefix to each identifier, which quickly conflicts with our 80-column policy. The new name is shorter, it's what a lot of people use when speaking about that construction anyway, and hopefully should not introduce confusion at it seems unlikely that variants other than 20/1305 be standardised in the foreseeable future.
2018-05-07 08:43:27 +00:00
depends_on:MBEDTLS_CHACHAPOLY_C
Add ChaCha20+Poly1305 to the Cipher module
2016-05-17 23:33:28 +00:00
enc_dec_buf:MBEDTLS_CIPHER_CHACHA20_POLY1305:"CHACHA20-POLY1305":256:16:-1
ChaCha20+Poly1305 Encrypt and decrypt 17 bytes
Rename aead_chacha20_poly1305 to chachapoly While the old name is explicit and aligned with the RFC, it's also very long, so with the mbedtls_ prefix prepended we get a 31-char prefix to each identifier, which quickly conflicts with our 80-column policy. The new name is shorter, it's what a lot of people use when speaking about that construction anyway, and hopefully should not introduce confusion at it seems unlikely that variants other than 20/1305 be standardised in the foreseeable future.
2018-05-07 08:43:27 +00:00
depends_on:MBEDTLS_CHACHAPOLY_C
Add ChaCha20+Poly1305 to the Cipher module
2016-05-17 23:33:28 +00:00
enc_dec_buf:MBEDTLS_CIPHER_CHACHA20_POLY1305:"CHACHA20-POLY1305":256:17:-1
ChaCha20+Poly1305 Encrypt and decrypt 31 bytes
Rename aead_chacha20_poly1305 to chachapoly While the old name is explicit and aligned with the RFC, it's also very long, so with the mbedtls_ prefix prepended we get a 31-char prefix to each identifier, which quickly conflicts with our 80-column policy. The new name is shorter, it's what a lot of people use when speaking about that construction anyway, and hopefully should not introduce confusion at it seems unlikely that variants other than 20/1305 be standardised in the foreseeable future.
2018-05-07 08:43:27 +00:00
depends_on:MBEDTLS_CHACHAPOLY_C
Add ChaCha20+Poly1305 to the Cipher module
2016-05-17 23:33:28 +00:00
enc_dec_buf:MBEDTLS_CIPHER_CHACHA20_POLY1305:"CHACHA20-POLY1305":256:31:-1
ChaCha20+Poly1305 Encrypt and decrypt 32 bytes
Rename aead_chacha20_poly1305 to chachapoly While the old name is explicit and aligned with the RFC, it's also very long, so with the mbedtls_ prefix prepended we get a 31-char prefix to each identifier, which quickly conflicts with our 80-column policy. The new name is shorter, it's what a lot of people use when speaking about that construction anyway, and hopefully should not introduce confusion at it seems unlikely that variants other than 20/1305 be standardised in the foreseeable future.
2018-05-07 08:43:27 +00:00
depends_on:MBEDTLS_CHACHAPOLY_C
Add ChaCha20+Poly1305 to the Cipher module
2016-05-17 23:33:28 +00:00
enc_dec_buf:MBEDTLS_CIPHER_CHACHA20_POLY1305:"CHACHA20-POLY1305":256:32:-1
ChaCha20+Poly1305 Encrypt and decrypt 33 bytes
Rename aead_chacha20_poly1305 to chachapoly While the old name is explicit and aligned with the RFC, it's also very long, so with the mbedtls_ prefix prepended we get a 31-char prefix to each identifier, which quickly conflicts with our 80-column policy. The new name is shorter, it's what a lot of people use when speaking about that construction anyway, and hopefully should not introduce confusion at it seems unlikely that variants other than 20/1305 be standardised in the foreseeable future.
2018-05-07 08:43:27 +00:00
depends_on:MBEDTLS_CHACHAPOLY_C
Add ChaCha20+Poly1305 to the Cipher module
2016-05-17 23:33:28 +00:00
enc_dec_buf:MBEDTLS_CIPHER_CHACHA20_POLY1305:"CHACHA20-POLY1305":256:33:-1
ChaCha20+Poly1305 Encrypt and decrypt 47 bytes
Rename aead_chacha20_poly1305 to chachapoly While the old name is explicit and aligned with the RFC, it's also very long, so with the mbedtls_ prefix prepended we get a 31-char prefix to each identifier, which quickly conflicts with our 80-column policy. The new name is shorter, it's what a lot of people use when speaking about that construction anyway, and hopefully should not introduce confusion at it seems unlikely that variants other than 20/1305 be standardised in the foreseeable future.
2018-05-07 08:43:27 +00:00
depends_on:MBEDTLS_CHACHAPOLY_C
Add ChaCha20+Poly1305 to the Cipher module
2016-05-17 23:33:28 +00:00
enc_dec_buf:MBEDTLS_CIPHER_CHACHA20_POLY1305:"CHACHA20-POLY1305":256:47:-1
ChaCha20+Poly1305 Encrypt and decrypt 48 bytes
Rename aead_chacha20_poly1305 to chachapoly While the old name is explicit and aligned with the RFC, it's also very long, so with the mbedtls_ prefix prepended we get a 31-char prefix to each identifier, which quickly conflicts with our 80-column policy. The new name is shorter, it's what a lot of people use when speaking about that construction anyway, and hopefully should not introduce confusion at it seems unlikely that variants other than 20/1305 be standardised in the foreseeable future.
2018-05-07 08:43:27 +00:00
depends_on:MBEDTLS_CHACHAPOLY_C
Add ChaCha20+Poly1305 to the Cipher module
2016-05-17 23:33:28 +00:00
enc_dec_buf:MBEDTLS_CIPHER_CHACHA20_POLY1305:"CHACHA20-POLY1305":256:48:-1
ChaCha20+Poly1305 Encrypt and decrypt 49 bytes
Rename aead_chacha20_poly1305 to chachapoly While the old name is explicit and aligned with the RFC, it's also very long, so with the mbedtls_ prefix prepended we get a 31-char prefix to each identifier, which quickly conflicts with our 80-column policy. The new name is shorter, it's what a lot of people use when speaking about that construction anyway, and hopefully should not introduce confusion at it seems unlikely that variants other than 20/1305 be standardised in the foreseeable future.
2018-05-07 08:43:27 +00:00
depends_on:MBEDTLS_CHACHAPOLY_C
Add ChaCha20+Poly1305 to the Cipher module
2016-05-17 23:33:28 +00:00
enc_dec_buf:MBEDTLS_CIPHER_CHACHA20_POLY1305:"CHACHA20-POLY1305":256:49:-1
ChaCha20+Poly1305 Encrypt and decrypt 0 bytes in multiple parts 1
Rename aead_chacha20_poly1305 to chachapoly While the old name is explicit and aligned with the RFC, it's also very long, so with the mbedtls_ prefix prepended we get a 31-char prefix to each identifier, which quickly conflicts with our 80-column policy. The new name is shorter, it's what a lot of people use when speaking about that construction anyway, and hopefully should not introduce confusion at it seems unlikely that variants other than 20/1305 be standardised in the foreseeable future.
2018-05-07 08:43:27 +00:00
depends_on:MBEDTLS_CHACHAPOLY_C
Add ChaCha20+Poly1305 to the Cipher module
2016-05-17 23:33:28 +00:00
enc_dec_buf_multipart:MBEDTLS_CIPHER_CHACHA20_POLY1305:256:0:0:-1:0:0:0:0
ChaCha20+Poly1305 Encrypt and decrypt 1 bytes in multiple parts 1
Rename aead_chacha20_poly1305 to chachapoly While the old name is explicit and aligned with the RFC, it's also very long, so with the mbedtls_ prefix prepended we get a 31-char prefix to each identifier, which quickly conflicts with our 80-column policy. The new name is shorter, it's what a lot of people use when speaking about that construction anyway, and hopefully should not introduce confusion at it seems unlikely that variants other than 20/1305 be standardised in the foreseeable future.
2018-05-07 08:43:27 +00:00
depends_on:MBEDTLS_CHACHAPOLY_C
Add ChaCha20+Poly1305 to the Cipher module
2016-05-17 23:33:28 +00:00
enc_dec_buf_multipart:MBEDTLS_CIPHER_CHACHA20_POLY1305:256:1:0:-1:1:0:1:0
ChaCha20+Poly1305 Encrypt and decrypt 1 bytes in multiple parts 2
Rename aead_chacha20_poly1305 to chachapoly While the old name is explicit and aligned with the RFC, it's also very long, so with the mbedtls_ prefix prepended we get a 31-char prefix to each identifier, which quickly conflicts with our 80-column policy. The new name is shorter, it's what a lot of people use when speaking about that construction anyway, and hopefully should not introduce confusion at it seems unlikely that variants other than 20/1305 be standardised in the foreseeable future.
2018-05-07 08:43:27 +00:00
depends_on:MBEDTLS_CHACHAPOLY_C
Add ChaCha20+Poly1305 to the Cipher module
2016-05-17 23:33:28 +00:00
enc_dec_buf_multipart:MBEDTLS_CIPHER_CHACHA20_POLY1305:256:0:1:-1:0:1:0:1
ChaCha20+Poly1305 Encrypt and decrypt 16 bytes in multiple parts 1
Rename aead_chacha20_poly1305 to chachapoly While the old name is explicit and aligned with the RFC, it's also very long, so with the mbedtls_ prefix prepended we get a 31-char prefix to each identifier, which quickly conflicts with our 80-column policy. The new name is shorter, it's what a lot of people use when speaking about that construction anyway, and hopefully should not introduce confusion at it seems unlikely that variants other than 20/1305 be standardised in the foreseeable future.
2018-05-07 08:43:27 +00:00
depends_on:MBEDTLS_CHACHAPOLY_C
Add ChaCha20+Poly1305 to the Cipher module
2016-05-17 23:33:28 +00:00
enc_dec_buf_multipart:MBEDTLS_CIPHER_CHACHA20_POLY1305:256:16:0:-1:16:0:16:0
ChaCha20+Poly1305 Encrypt and decrypt 16 bytes in multiple parts 2
Rename aead_chacha20_poly1305 to chachapoly While the old name is explicit and aligned with the RFC, it's also very long, so with the mbedtls_ prefix prepended we get a 31-char prefix to each identifier, which quickly conflicts with our 80-column policy. The new name is shorter, it's what a lot of people use when speaking about that construction anyway, and hopefully should not introduce confusion at it seems unlikely that variants other than 20/1305 be standardised in the foreseeable future.
2018-05-07 08:43:27 +00:00
depends_on:MBEDTLS_CHACHAPOLY_C
Add ChaCha20+Poly1305 to the Cipher module
2016-05-17 23:33:28 +00:00
enc_dec_buf_multipart:MBEDTLS_CIPHER_CHACHA20_POLY1305:256:0:16:-1:0:16:0:16
ChaCha20+Poly1305 Encrypt and decrypt 16 bytes in multiple parts 3
Rename aead_chacha20_poly1305 to chachapoly While the old name is explicit and aligned with the RFC, it's also very long, so with the mbedtls_ prefix prepended we get a 31-char prefix to each identifier, which quickly conflicts with our 80-column policy. The new name is shorter, it's what a lot of people use when speaking about that construction anyway, and hopefully should not introduce confusion at it seems unlikely that variants other than 20/1305 be standardised in the foreseeable future.
2018-05-07 08:43:27 +00:00
depends_on:MBEDTLS_CHACHAPOLY_C
Add ChaCha20+Poly1305 to the Cipher module
2016-05-17 23:33:28 +00:00
enc_dec_buf_multipart:MBEDTLS_CIPHER_CHACHA20_POLY1305:256:1:15:-1:1:15:1:15
ChaCha20+Poly1305 Encrypt and decrypt 16 bytes in multiple parts 4
Rename aead_chacha20_poly1305 to chachapoly While the old name is explicit and aligned with the RFC, it's also very long, so with the mbedtls_ prefix prepended we get a 31-char prefix to each identifier, which quickly conflicts with our 80-column policy. The new name is shorter, it's what a lot of people use when speaking about that construction anyway, and hopefully should not introduce confusion at it seems unlikely that variants other than 20/1305 be standardised in the foreseeable future.
2018-05-07 08:43:27 +00:00
depends_on:MBEDTLS_CHACHAPOLY_C
Add ChaCha20+Poly1305 to the Cipher module
2016-05-17 23:33:28 +00:00
enc_dec_buf_multipart:MBEDTLS_CIPHER_CHACHA20_POLY1305:256:15:1:-1:15:1:15:1
ChaCha20+Poly1305 Encrypt and decrypt 22 bytes in multiple parts 1
Rename aead_chacha20_poly1305 to chachapoly While the old name is explicit and aligned with the RFC, it's also very long, so with the mbedtls_ prefix prepended we get a 31-char prefix to each identifier, which quickly conflicts with our 80-column policy. The new name is shorter, it's what a lot of people use when speaking about that construction anyway, and hopefully should not introduce confusion at it seems unlikely that variants other than 20/1305 be standardised in the foreseeable future.
2018-05-07 08:43:27 +00:00
depends_on:MBEDTLS_CHACHAPOLY_C
Add ChaCha20+Poly1305 to the Cipher module
2016-05-17 23:33:28 +00:00
enc_dec_buf_multipart:MBEDTLS_CIPHER_CHACHA20_POLY1305:256:15:7:-1:15:7:15:7
ChaCha20+Poly1305 Encrypt and decrypt 22 bytes in multiple parts 2
Rename aead_chacha20_poly1305 to chachapoly While the old name is explicit and aligned with the RFC, it's also very long, so with the mbedtls_ prefix prepended we get a 31-char prefix to each identifier, which quickly conflicts with our 80-column policy. The new name is shorter, it's what a lot of people use when speaking about that construction anyway, and hopefully should not introduce confusion at it seems unlikely that variants other than 20/1305 be standardised in the foreseeable future.
2018-05-07 08:43:27 +00:00
depends_on:MBEDTLS_CHACHAPOLY_C
Add ChaCha20+Poly1305 to the Cipher module
2016-05-17 23:33:28 +00:00
enc_dec_buf_multipart:MBEDTLS_CIPHER_CHACHA20_POLY1305:256:7:15:-1:7:15:7:15
ChaCha20+Poly1305 Encrypt and decrypt 22 bytes in multiple parts 3
Rename aead_chacha20_poly1305 to chachapoly While the old name is explicit and aligned with the RFC, it's also very long, so with the mbedtls_ prefix prepended we get a 31-char prefix to each identifier, which quickly conflicts with our 80-column policy. The new name is shorter, it's what a lot of people use when speaking about that construction anyway, and hopefully should not introduce confusion at it seems unlikely that variants other than 20/1305 be standardised in the foreseeable future.
2018-05-07 08:43:27 +00:00
depends_on:MBEDTLS_CHACHAPOLY_C
Add ChaCha20+Poly1305 to the Cipher module
2016-05-17 23:33:28 +00:00
enc_dec_buf_multipart:MBEDTLS_CIPHER_CHACHA20_POLY1305:256:16:6:-1:16:6:16:6
ChaCha20+Poly1305 Encrypt and decrypt 22 bytes in multiple parts 4
Rename aead_chacha20_poly1305 to chachapoly While the old name is explicit and aligned with the RFC, it's also very long, so with the mbedtls_ prefix prepended we get a 31-char prefix to each identifier, which quickly conflicts with our 80-column policy. The new name is shorter, it's what a lot of people use when speaking about that construction anyway, and hopefully should not introduce confusion at it seems unlikely that variants other than 20/1305 be standardised in the foreseeable future.
2018-05-07 08:43:27 +00:00
depends_on:MBEDTLS_CHACHAPOLY_C
Add ChaCha20+Poly1305 to the Cipher module
2016-05-17 23:33:28 +00:00
enc_dec_buf_multipart:MBEDTLS_CIPHER_CHACHA20_POLY1305:256:6:16:-1:6:16:6:16
ChaCha20+Poly1305 Encrypt and decrypt 32 bytes in multiple parts
Rename aead_chacha20_poly1305 to chachapoly While the old name is explicit and aligned with the RFC, it's also very long, so with the mbedtls_ prefix prepended we get a 31-char prefix to each identifier, which quickly conflicts with our 80-column policy. The new name is shorter, it's what a lot of people use when speaking about that construction anyway, and hopefully should not introduce confusion at it seems unlikely that variants other than 20/1305 be standardised in the foreseeable future.
2018-05-07 08:43:27 +00:00
depends_on:MBEDTLS_CHACHAPOLY_C
Add ChaCha20+Poly1305 to the Cipher module
2016-05-17 23:33:28 +00:00
enc_dec_buf_multipart:MBEDTLS_CIPHER_CHACHA20_POLY1305:256:16:16:-1:16:16:16:16
Reference in a new issue Copy permalink