crypto: add generatePrime/checkPrime by jasnell · Pull Request #36997 · nodejs/node

APIs for generating and checking pseudo-random primes

Signed-off-by: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>

PR-URL: #36997
Reviewed-By: Tobias Nießen <tniessen@tnie.de>

APIs for generating and checking pseudo-random primes

Signed-off-by: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>

PR-URL: #36997
Reviewed-By: Tobias Nießen <tniessen@tnie.de>

Notable changes:

crypto:
  * (SEMVER-MINOR) add generatePrime/checkPrime (James M Snell) #36997
  * (SEMVER-MINOR) experimental (Ed/X)25519/(Ed/X)448 support (James M Snell) #36879
deps:
  * upgrade npm to 7.5.0 (Ruy Adorno) #37117
dgram:
  * (SEMVER-MINOR) support AbortSignal in createSocket (Nitzan Uziely) #37026
doc:
  * add Zijian Liu to collaborators (ZiJian Liu) #37075
esm:
  * deprecate legacy main lookup for modules (Guy Bedford) #36918
readline:
  * (SEMVER-MINOR) add history event and option to set initial history (Mattias Runge-Broberg) #33662
  * (SEMVER-MINOR) add support for the AbortController to the question method (Mattias Runge-Broberg) #33676

PR-URL: TODO

Notable changes:

crypto:
  * (SEMVER-MINOR) add generatePrime/checkPrime (James M Snell) #36997
  * (SEMVER-MINOR) experimental (Ed/X)25519/(Ed/X)448 support (James M Snell) #36879
deps:
  * upgrade npm to 7.5.0 (Ruy Adorno) #37117
dgram:
  * (SEMVER-MINOR) support AbortSignal in createSocket (Nitzan Uziely) #37026
doc:
  * add Zijian Liu to collaborators (ZiJian Liu) #37075
esm:
  * deprecate legacy main lookup for modules (Guy Bedford) #36918
readline:
  * (SEMVER-MINOR) add history event and option to set initial history (Mattias Runge-Broberg) #33662
  * (SEMVER-MINOR) add support for the AbortController to the question method (Mattias Runge-Broberg) #33676

PR-URL: #37183

Notable changes:

crypto:
  * (SEMVER-MINOR) add generatePrime/checkPrime (James M Snell) #36997
  * (SEMVER-MINOR) experimental (Ed/X)25519/(Ed/X)448 support (James M Snell) #36879
deps:
  * upgrade npm to 7.5.0 (Ruy Adorno) #37117
dgram:
  * (SEMVER-MINOR) support AbortSignal in createSocket (Nitzan Uziely) #37026
doc:
  * add Zijian Liu to collaborators (ZiJian Liu) #37075
esm:
  * deprecate legacy main lookup for modules (Guy Bedford) #36918
readline:
  * (SEMVER-MINOR) add history event and option to set initial history (Mattias Runge-Broberg) #33662
  * (SEMVER-MINOR) add support for the AbortController to the question method (Mattias Runge-Broberg) #33676

PR-URL: #37183

Notable changes:

crypto:
  * (SEMVER-MINOR) add generatePrime/checkPrime (James M Snell) #36997
  * (SEMVER-MINOR) experimental (Ed/X)25519/(Ed/X)448 support (James M Snell) #36879
deps:
  * upgrade npm to 7.5.0 (Ruy Adorno) #37117
dgram:
  * (SEMVER-MINOR) support AbortSignal in createSocket (Nitzan Uziely) #37026
doc:
  * add Zijian Liu to collaborators (ZiJian Liu) #37075
esm:
  * deprecate legacy main lookup for modules (Guy Bedford) #36918
readline:
  * (SEMVER-MINOR) add history event and option to set initial history (Mattias Runge-Broberg) #33662
  * (SEMVER-MINOR) add support for the AbortController to the question method (Mattias Runge-Broberg) #33676

PR-URL: #37183

This test had two problems:

* The first argument was a number in both cases, which is what caused
  the (expected) ERR_INVALID_ARG_TYPE error -- the validity of the
  'checks' option was not actually verified at all. Thus, the first
  argument should be valid for this particular test.
* The function returned by common.mustNotCall() was passed to
  assert.throws() as a third argument instead of being passed to
  checkPrime() as a third argument. (Isn't JavaScript great?) This again
  led to the (expected) ERR_INVALID_ARG_TYPE error, but again, the
  validity of the 'checks' option was not verified.

Fix both issues by ensuring that all arguments except the 'checks'
option are valid.

Refs: nodejs#36997

This test had two problems:

* The first argument was a number in both cases, which is what caused
  the (expected) ERR_INVALID_ARG_TYPE error -- the validity of the
  'checks' option was not actually verified at all. Thus, the first
  argument should be valid for this particular test.
* The function returned by common.mustNotCall() was passed to
  assert.throws() as a third argument instead of being passed to
  checkPrime() as a third argument. (Isn't JavaScript great?) This again
  led to the (expected) ERR_INVALID_ARG_TYPE error, but again, the
  validity of the 'checks' option was not verified.

Fix both issues by ensuring that all arguments except the 'checks'
option are valid.

Refs: #36997
PR-URL: #47139
Reviewed-By: Filip Skokan <panva.ip@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com>

This test had two problems:

* The first argument was a number in both cases, which is what caused
  the (expected) ERR_INVALID_ARG_TYPE error -- the validity of the
  'checks' option was not actually verified at all. Thus, the first
  argument should be valid for this particular test.
* The function returned by common.mustNotCall() was passed to
  assert.throws() as a third argument instead of being passed to
  checkPrime() as a third argument. (Isn't JavaScript great?) This again
  led to the (expected) ERR_INVALID_ARG_TYPE error, but again, the
  validity of the 'checks' option was not verified.

Fix both issues by ensuring that all arguments except the 'checks'
option are valid.

Refs: #36997
PR-URL: #47139
Reviewed-By: Filip Skokan <panva.ip@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com>

This test had two problems:

* The first argument was a number in both cases, which is what caused
  the (expected) ERR_INVALID_ARG_TYPE error -- the validity of the
  'checks' option was not actually verified at all. Thus, the first
  argument should be valid for this particular test.
* The function returned by common.mustNotCall() was passed to
  assert.throws() as a third argument instead of being passed to
  checkPrime() as a third argument. (Isn't JavaScript great?) This again
  led to the (expected) ERR_INVALID_ARG_TYPE error, but again, the
  validity of the 'checks' option was not verified.

Fix both issues by ensuring that all arguments except the 'checks'
option are valid.

Refs: #36997
PR-URL: #47139
Reviewed-By: Filip Skokan <panva.ip@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com>

This test had two problems:

* The first argument was a number in both cases, which is what caused
  the (expected) ERR_INVALID_ARG_TYPE error -- the validity of the
  'checks' option was not actually verified at all. Thus, the first
  argument should be valid for this particular test.
* The function returned by common.mustNotCall() was passed to
  assert.throws() as a third argument instead of being passed to
  checkPrime() as a third argument. (Isn't JavaScript great?) This again
  led to the (expected) ERR_INVALID_ARG_TYPE error, but again, the
  validity of the 'checks' option was not verified.

Fix both issues by ensuring that all arguments except the 'checks'
option are valid.

Refs: #36997
PR-URL: #47139
Reviewed-By: Filip Skokan <panva.ip@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com>