{"action":"created","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/IRATI/stack/issues/791","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/IRATI/stack/issues/791/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/IRATI/stack/issues/791/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/IRATI/stack/issues/791/events","html_url":"https://github.com/IRATI/stack/pull/791","id":116943190,"number":791,"title":"Integrate SDU protection into SDK","user":{"login":"vmaffione","id":4920001,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/4920001?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/vmaffione","html_url":"https://github.com/vmaffione","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/vmaffione/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/vmaffione/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/vmaffione/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/vmaffione/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/vmaffione/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/vmaffione/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/vmaffione/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/vmaffione/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/vmaffione/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"milestone":null,"comments":8,"created_at":"2015-11-14T18:19:43Z","updated_at":"2015-11-16T11:46:13Z","closed_at":null,"pull_request":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/IRATI/stack/pulls/791","html_url":"https://github.com/IRATI/stack/pull/791","diff_url":"https://github.com/IRATI/stack/pull/791.diff","patch_url":"https://github.com/IRATI/stack/pull/791.patch"},"body":"This builds on #789, and adds some SDK-specific support (component delivery workflow) in addition to some minor fixes.\r\n\r\nHowever, something is still missing: @edugrasa @olichtne , where in the DIF template should the name/version of the SDUP policy set be specified? I see security profiles and various policies, but couldn't find a way to map them to the sdup-ps defined in this policy set. Do you have some hint, suggestion about that? what do you guys think?"},"comment":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/IRATI/stack/issues/comments/157005930","html_url":"https://github.com/IRATI/stack/pull/791#issuecomment-157005930","issue_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/IRATI/stack/issues/791","id":157005930,"user":{"login":"edugrasa","id":325005,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/325005?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/edugrasa","html_url":"https://github.com/edugrasa","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/edugrasa/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/edugrasa/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/edugrasa/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/edugrasa/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/edugrasa/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/edugrasa/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/edugrasa/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/edugrasa/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/edugrasa/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"created_at":"2015-11-16T11:46:12Z","updated_at":"2015-11-16T11:46:12Z","body":"I've just issued a PR to Vincenzo with sdu ps-common removed (that code is in ps-default now). After checking the sdup code more in depth, I've seen that the sdup code does some configuration parsing that belongs to the policy sets. I'll fix that also.\r\n\r\nBut first I think we should remove the sdu-ps and have 3 policy sets instead:\r\n* sdup-ttl-ps, with the following operations (from current sdu-ps):\r\n** sdup_set_lifetime_limit_policy, sdup_get_lifetime_limit_policy, sdup_dec_check_lifetime_limit_policy\r\n* sdup-crc-ps, with the following operations (from current sdu-ps):\r\n** sdup_add_error_check_policy, sdup_check_error_check_policy\r\n* sdup-encrypt-ps, with the following operations (from current sdu-ps):\r\n** sdup_encrypt_policy, sdup_decrypt_policy, sdup_add_hmac, sdup_verify_hmac\r\n\r\nAs you may notice the new encrypt would perform the current compress, add padding and encrypt operations. This is because I don't think they need to be exposed via the PS interface as different functions because they are part of the same policy set and the \"protect\" method in the sdup.c calls them in this order always (compress, add padding, encrypt). Same thing for the unprotect side, the new decrypt operation will perform the old decrypt, remove_padding, decompress operations.\r\n\r\n@olichtne, @vmaffione  if you agree I'll implement these changes (should just be moving code around also, and changing some glue code). "}}