Re: [PATCH ima-evm-utils v3] ima-evm-utils: Support SM2 algorithm for sign and verify

[Tianjia Zhang <tianjia.zhang@linux.alibaba.com>]

On 7/12/21 8:35 PM, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> On Mon, 2021-07-12 at 20:12 +0800, Tianjia Zhang wrote:
>>
>> On 7/9/21 8:05 PM, Mimi Zohar wrote:
>>> On Fri, 2021-07-09 at 17:06 +0800, Tianjia Zhang wrote:
>>>> On 7/7/21 10:28 AM, Mimi Zohar wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>> I'm also seeing:
>>>>> - openssl req -verbose -new -nodes -utf8 -days 10000 -batch -x509 -sm3
>>>>> -sigopt distid:1234567812345678 -config test-ca.conf -copy_extensions
>>>>> copyall -newkey sm2 -out test-sm2.cer -outform DER -keyout test-sm2.key
>>>>> req: Unrecognized flag copy_extensions
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This command is for openssl 3.0, and '-copy_extensions copyall' is also
>>>> a parameter supported on 3.0. At present, the mainstream version of
>>>> openssl 1.1.1 only partially supports SM2 signatures. For example, the
>>>> USERID in the SM2 specification cannot be used, and the certificate
>>>> cannot be operated in the command using the SM2/3 algorithm combination,
>>>> just like the modification of libimaevm.c in this patch, this cannot be
>>>> done directly through the openssl command, even if the '-copy_extensions
>>>> copyall' parameter is deleted, this command will be failed on openssl
>>>> 1.1.1. The final solution may be openssl 3.0.
>>>>
>>>> On openssl 1.1.1, there is no problem to operate the signature of the
>>>> SM2/3 algorithm combination through the API. If it is possible, the
>>>> sign_verify test of sm2/3 is not required. What is your opinion?
>>>
>>> Instead of dropping the test altogether, add an openssl version
>>> dependency.
>>
>> Great. will do in next version patch.
> 
> Please consider adding a new CI distro matrix rule that includes the
> needed openssl version.  Another option would be to define a new script
> in the tests directory to install openssl from the git repo.  Please
> limit using that script to a single distro matrix rule.
> 

Got it, thanks for your suggestion. It seems that the second method is 
more suitable.

Thanks,
Tianjia