-
-
Couldn't load subscription status.
- Fork 2.2k
Add TLS 1.3 HelloRetryRequest #2260
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
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #2260 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 87.76% 87.69% -0.08%
==========================================
Files 242 242
Lines 50553 50639 +86
==========================================
+ Hits 44369 44406 +37
- Misses 6184 6233 +49
|
|
Hi, Thanks for this PR. You have two failed tests. Could you have a look? For the second one, you may need to add |
|
The first failed test is a bit unclear to me because it failed when generating the doc and I didn't change this part. I am still looking at it. For the second one, I didn't used ~ crypto_advanced flag on purpose because I thought it was necessary only for key exchange with curve x25519, but the curve used for this test is secp256r1. But I think this flag is also necessary because of the symmetric cipher, so I will add it. |
|
Hi, I have been able to reproduce the first failed test and I found a way to fix it but I am not sure if it's the right way to fix it or not. The error is caused by a missing module 'cryptography' when importing module 'all' from module 'scapy.layers.tls'. So, if I add the module 'cryptography' in deps for [testenv:docs] defined in the tox.ini as follow, the test is not failing anymore : But I can't really see why it was failing only in this pull request and not in my previous one. Could it be possible that the module 'scapy.layers.tls' was not imported previously ? Do you have any ideas on this ? |
|
TLS files are using a safe check to be able to be imported even without cryptography:
Please continue to use those, that way it won't crash :p I must say I am not sure why it was done this way, I don't know if many things work without cryptography.. Side note: I think you could hardcore the RetryRequest bytes marker with a comment explaining how it got generated. |
|
Hi, Regarding I believe it's still the intention of the maintainers not to depend upon |
f35cac7 to
47c6011
Compare
47c6011 to
b658909
Compare
|
Let's move on. This has staled for too long already |
|
@romain-perez Sorry for the delay, feel free to create PRs out of your other branches. |
This pull request adds :
Edits by gpotter2: