-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 10
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Remove legacy plugin tests #34
Conversation
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #34 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 76.80% 70.74% -6.06%
==========================================
Files 2 2
Lines 1095 1128 +33
==========================================
- Hits 841 798 -43
- Misses 254 330 +76 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
Not all of those ciphers are legacy ones... |
# https://www.openssl.org/docs/man3.0/man7/OSSL_PROVIDER-legacy.html | ||
@testset "Encrypt" begin | ||
if OpenSSL.version_number() ≥ v"3" | ||
OpenSSL.load_legacy_provider() |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The load_legacy_provider
function and associated code would go away, I suppose.
EvpBlowFishECB(), # legacy | ||
#EvpBlowFishCFB(), // not supported | ||
EvpBlowFishOFB(), # legacy | ||
EvpAES128CBC(), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
EvpAES128CBC
, EvpAES128ECB
and EvpAES128OFB
aren't marked as legacy and should remain.
end | ||
|
||
@testset "EncryptCustomKey" begin | ||
# EvpBlowFishECB is legacy, consider using EvpAES128ECB instead |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Instead of being removed, this test could be moved to a non-legacy cipher as suggested in the comment.
@quinnj gentle bump: could you please have a look at the comments above? 🙂 |
9734554
to
e6cdfd0
Compare
For context, see discussion in JuliaLang/julia#53891