Separated rbnacl hmac implementations #521
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
- HMAC using OpenSSL (default) - HMAC with RbNaCl for keys under 32 chars (rbnacl < 6.0) - HMAC with RbNaCl (rbnacl >= 6.0)
anakinj
force-pushed
the
separated-rbnacl-hmac-implementations
branch
from
db7a947
to
18888b8
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This moves the RbNaCl specific logic from the default (OpenSSL) HMAC algorithm into dedicated classes.
Why multiple? Well, in the process of extracting the logic I noticed RbNaCl is not having the key limit of 32 chars anymore, so there is now two variants for the RbNaCl implementation for backwards compatibility with pre 6.0 RbNACl versions.
Support for
'rbnacl', '< 6.0'with the fixed key length of 32 chars could be dropped in ruby-jwt 3.0.