Re: [PATCH] bcrypt/tests: Add more BCryptGetFipsAlgorithmMode tests

[Sebastian Lackner]

On 08.09.2016 13:53, Bruno Jesus wrote:
> From: Kai Blaschke <kai.blaschke(a)kb-dev.net>
> Signed-off-by: Bruno Jesus <00cpxxx(a)gmail.com>
> ---
>  dlls/bcrypt/tests/Makefile.in |  2 +-
>  dlls/bcrypt/tests/bcrypt.c    | 49 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>  2 files changed, 49 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/dlls/bcrypt/tests/Makefile.in b/dlls/bcrypt/tests/Makefile.in
> index 0f130b1..1bf7d2c 100644
> --- a/dlls/bcrypt/tests/Makefile.in
> +++ b/dlls/bcrypt/tests/Makefile.in
> @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
>  TESTDLL  = bcrypt.dll
> -IMPORTS  = bcrypt user32
> +IMPORTS  = bcrypt user32 advapi32
>
> C_SRCS = \
>   bcrypt.c
> diff --git a/dlls/bcrypt/tests/bcrypt.c b/dlls/bcrypt/tests/bcrypt.c
> index 9bd2cea..d16735c 100644
> --- a/dlls/bcrypt/tests/bcrypt.c
> +++ b/dlls/bcrypt/tests/bcrypt.c
> @@ -61,14 +61,61 @@ static void test_BCryptGenRandom(void)
>
> static void test_BCryptGetFipsAlgorithmMode(void)
>  {
> -    NTSTATUS ret;
> +    static const WCHAR policyKeyVistaW[] = {
> +        'S','y','s','t','e','m','\\',
> +        'C','u','r','r','e','n','t','C','o','n','t','r','o','l','S','e','t','\\',
> +        'C','o','n','t','r','o','l','\\',
> +        'L','s','a','\\',
> +        'F','I','P','S','A','l','g','o','r','i','t','h','m','P','o','l','i','c','y',0};
> +    static const WCHAR policyValueVistaW[] = {'E','n','a','b','l','e','d',0};
> +    static const WCHAR policyKeyXPW[] = {
> +        'S','y','s','t','e','m','\\',
> +        'C','u','r','r','e','n','t','C','o','n','t','r','o','l','S','e','t','\\',
> +        'C','o','n','t','r','o','l','\\',
> +        'L','s','a',0};
> +    static const WCHAR policyValueXPW[] = {
> +        'F','I','P','S','A','l','g','o','r','i','t','h','m','P','o','l','i','c','y',0};
> +    HKEY hkey;
> +    BOOLEAN expected;
> +    BOOLEAN result;
>      BOOLEAN enabled;
> +    DWORD value, count = sizeof(value);
> +    NTSTATUS ret;
>
> ret = BCryptGetFipsAlgorithmMode(&enabled);
>      ok(ret == STATUS_SUCCESS, "Expected STATUS_SUCCESS, got 0x%x\n", ret);
>
> ret = BCryptGetFipsAlgorithmMode(NULL);
>      ok(ret == STATUS_INVALID_PARAMETER, "Expected STATUS_INVALID_PARAMETER, got 0x%x\n", ret);
> +
> +    expected = FALSE;
> +
> +    if (!RegOpenKeyW(HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE, policyKeyVistaW, &hkey))
> +    {
> +        if (!RegGetValueW(HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE, policyKeyVistaW, policyValueVistaW,
> +            RRF_RT_REG_DWORD, NULL, &enabled, &count))
> +        {
> +            expected = !!enabled;
> +        }
> +        RegCloseKey(hkey);
> +    }
> +    else if (!RegOpenKeyW(HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE, policyKeyXPW, &hkey))
> +    {
> +        if (!RegGetValueW(HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE, policyKeyXPW, policyValueXPW,
> +            RRF_RT_REG_DWORD, NULL, &enabled, &count))
> +        {
> +            expected = !!enabled;
> +        }
> +        RegCloseKey(hkey);
> +    }
> +
> +    ret = BCryptGetFipsAlgorithmMode(&result);
> +    ok(!ret, "expected status STATUS_SUCCESS(0), got 0x%08X\n", ret);
> +    ok(result == expected, "expected result %d, got %d\n", expected, result);
> +
> +    ret = BCryptGetFipsAlgorithmMode(NULL);
> +    ok(ret == STATUS_INVALID_PARAMETER,
> +       "expected status STATUS_INVALID_PARAMETER(0xC000000D), got 0x%08X\n", ret);

Is it intentional that you test everything twice? It would be
sufficient to add the "result == expected" check to the existing
testcase above.
> }
>
> static void format_hash(const UCHAR *bytes, ULONG size, char *buf)

[PATCH] bcrypt/tests: Add more BCryptGetFipsAlgorithmMode tests

[Bruno Jesus]

On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 11:36 AM, Sebastian Lackner
<sebastian(a)fds-team.de> wrote:
> Is it intentional that you test everything twice? It would be
> sufficient to add the "result == expected" check to the existing
> testcase above.

Oops, you are right. When Kai made these tests there were no previous
tests, I'll fix and resend. Thanks =)