The test is fixed. It's included in my PR #103, along with the
revised Dockerfile.
On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 11:03 AM Rob Tompkins wrote:
>
> Precisely. That’s another technique we’ve used in rng.
>
> -Ropb
>
> > On Aug 6, 2020, at 11:01 AM, Matt Sicker wrote:
> >
> > Or alternatively, if using ra
Precisely. That’s another technique we’ve used in rng.
-Ropb
> On Aug 6, 2020, at 11:01 AM, Matt Sicker wrote:
>
> Or alternatively, if using random values each time, have it retry the
> test with a different value. It's typically better to use an actual
> property testing library for these typ
Or alternatively, if using random values each time, have it retry the
test with a different value. It's typically better to use an actual
property testing library for these types of tests anyways. One example
library I found is https://jqwik.net/ (these types of testing
libraries are more common in
Since I'm in the code base anyway I'll see if I can look at it this
weekend and include it in my PR with the Dockerfile.
On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 10:56 AM Gary Gregory wrote:
>
> This is all fine and good but how would you fix the test such that it does
> not fail randomly. PR anyone?
>
> Gary
>
>
Choose a seed value for the `new Random()` constructor and the tests
will be deterministic.
On Thu, 6 Aug 2020 at 09:57, Rob Tompkins wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Aug 6, 2020, at 10:56 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
> >
> > This is all fine and good but how would you fix the test such that it does
> > not fail
> On Aug 6, 2020, at 10:56 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
>
> This is all fine and good but how would you fix the test such that it does
> not fail randomly. PR anyone?
Either static inputs for determinism, or putting a probabilistic boundary in
which the solution can fall.
-Rob
>
> Gary
>
> On
This is all fine and good but how would you fix the test such that it does
not fail randomly. PR anyone?
Gary
On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 10:54 AM Matt Sicker wrote:
> The ECC stuff I mostly learned about from various Bernstein papers
> like this one: https://cr.yp.to/newelliptic/nistecc-20160106.pd
> On Aug 6, 2020, at 10:53 AM, Matt Sicker wrote:
>
> The ECC stuff I mostly learned about from various Bernstein papers
> like this one: https://cr.yp.to/newelliptic/nistecc-20160106.pdf
Reminds me a lot of the Poincare Disk model….very interesting!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poincaré
The ECC stuff I mostly learned about from various Bernstein papers
like this one: https://cr.yp.to/newelliptic/nistecc-20160106.pdf
On Thu, 6 Aug 2020 at 09:50, Rob Tompkins wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Aug 6, 2020, at 10:42 AM, Matt Sicker wrote:
> >
> > Well, for testing RNGs, I can understand using pr
> On Aug 6, 2020, at 10:42 AM, Matt Sicker wrote:
>
> Well, for testing RNGs, I can understand using property testing, yes.
> It would also be useful for testing fuzzing scenarios like making sure
> the GCM tag is invalid for any random input data (giving a near zero
> probability of valid dat
Well, for testing RNGs, I can understand using property testing, yes.
It would also be useful for testing fuzzing scenarios like making sure
the GCM tag is invalid for any random input data (giving a near zero
probability of valid data) or that an elliptic curve implementation
doesn't leak out info
> On Aug 6, 2020, at 10:33 AM, Matt Sicker wrote:
>
> Now I hope we don't have unit tests depending on non-static state for
> its random number generator! ;)
We actually do have a considerable number of those in our projects where we use
probabilistic epsilons on the output. See commons-rng.
Now I hope we don't have unit tests depending on non-static state for
its random number generator! ;) I'd expect a crypto library's test
suites to include several hard-coded known-good and known-bad
ciphertexts with static keys/IVs similar to the test cases presented
in their RFCs (especially since
On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 8:31 AM Alex Remily wrote:
> No problem. I'll do it when I get home tonight.
>
Thanks Alex!
Gary
>
> On Thu, Aug 6, 2020, 8:25 AM Gary Gregory wrote:
>
> > Hi Alex,
> >
> > Would you mind creating that ticket with that info?
> >
> > Thank you,
> > Gary
> >
> > On Thu,
No problem. I'll do it when I get home tonight.
On Thu, Aug 6, 2020, 8:25 AM Gary Gregory wrote:
> Hi Alex,
>
> Would you mind creating that ticket with that info?
>
> Thank you,
> Gary
>
> On Thu, Aug 6, 2020, 08:10 Alex Remily wrote:
>
> > That is an intermittent issue that I haven't been ab
Hi Alex,
Would you mind creating that ticket with that info?
Thank you,
Gary
On Thu, Aug 6, 2020, 08:10 Alex Remily wrote:
> That is an intermittent issue that I haven't been able to reliably
> reproduce. As I recall, the test that's failing is supposed to fail, but
> in a different way. I t
That is an intermittent issue that I haven't been able to reliably
reproduce. As I recall, the test that's failing is supposed to fail, but
in a different way. I think it's supposed to fail because of a short
buffer but occasionally fails because of an internal error, and when that
happens this t
Hi All:
I am seeing what may be a random AEADBadTagException in GcmCipherTest?
For example:
[ERROR] testGcmTamperedData(org.apache.commons.crypto.cipher.GcmCipherTest)
Time elapsed: 0.015 s <<< ERROR!
881java.lang.Exception: Unexpected exception,
expected but
was
882 at
org.apache.commons
18 matches
Mail list logo
