exhaustive tests: remove erroneous comment from ecdsa_sig_sign
Mathematically, we always overflow when using the exhaustive tests (because our scalar order is 13 and our field order is on the order of 2^256), but the `overflow` variable returned when parsing a b32 as a scalar is always set to 0, to prevent infinite (or practically infinite) loops searching for non-overflowing scalars.
This commit is contained in:
parent
03ff8c2d0a
commit
678b0e5466
|
@ -225,14 +225,12 @@ static int secp256k1_ecdsa_sig_verify(const secp256k1_ecmult_context *ctx, const
|
|||
#if defined(EXHAUSTIVE_TEST_ORDER)
|
||||
{
|
||||
secp256k1_scalar computed_r;
|
||||
int overflow = 0;
|
||||
secp256k1_ge pr_ge;
|
||||
secp256k1_ge_set_gej(&pr_ge, &pr);
|
||||
secp256k1_fe_normalize(&pr_ge.x);
|
||||
|
||||
secp256k1_fe_get_b32(c, &pr_ge.x);
|
||||
secp256k1_scalar_set_b32(&computed_r, c, &overflow);
|
||||
/* we fully expect overflow */
|
||||
secp256k1_scalar_set_b32(&computed_r, c, NULL);
|
||||
return secp256k1_scalar_eq(sigr, &computed_r);
|
||||
}
|
||||
#else
|
||||
|
|
|
@ -77,7 +77,7 @@ int secp256k1_nonce_function_smallint(unsigned char *nonce32, const unsigned cha
|
|||
* function with an increased `attempt`. So if attempt > 0 this means we
|
||||
* need to change the nonce to avoid an infinite loop. */
|
||||
if (attempt > 0) {
|
||||
(*idata)++;
|
||||
*idata = (*idata + 1) % EXHAUSTIVE_TEST_ORDER;
|
||||
}
|
||||
secp256k1_scalar_set_int(&s, *idata);
|
||||
secp256k1_scalar_get_b32(nonce32, &s);
|
||||
|
@ -244,6 +244,7 @@ void test_exhaustive_sign(const secp256k1_context *ctx, const secp256k1_ge *grou
|
|||
for (i = 1; i < order; i++) { /* message */
|
||||
for (j = 1; j < order; j++) { /* key */
|
||||
for (k = 1; k < order; k++) { /* nonce */
|
||||
const int starting_k = k;
|
||||
secp256k1_ecdsa_signature sig;
|
||||
secp256k1_scalar sk, msg, r, s, expected_r;
|
||||
unsigned char sk32[32], msg32[32];
|
||||
|
@ -262,6 +263,11 @@ void test_exhaustive_sign(const secp256k1_context *ctx, const secp256k1_ge *grou
|
|||
CHECK(r == expected_r);
|
||||
CHECK((k * s) % order == (i + r * j) % order ||
|
||||
(k * (EXHAUSTIVE_TEST_ORDER - s)) % order == (i + r * j) % order);
|
||||
|
||||
/* Overflow means we've tried every possible nonce */
|
||||
if (k < starting_k) {
|
||||
break;
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue