chore(ext/crypto): Update rsa to 0.7.0

[kylewillmon]

Bump the rsa crate to 0.7.0

The API for the rsa crate has changed significantly, but I have verified that tests continue to pass throughout this update.

[CLAassistant]

All committers have signed the CLA.

[panva]

This doesn't seem right.

[panva]

This change will fly under the WPT radar because it only performs a round-trip test with the same parameters.

It is however expected that when signed with saltLength of a given value, only verify with a the same value will succeed. With the rsa update in place that's not the case.

[panva]

Please add the following test to cli/tests/unit/webcrypto_test.ts

// https://github.com/denoland/deno/pull/16327#pullrequestreview-1144702051
Deno.test(async function pssSaltLengthRoundTrip() {
  const keyPair = await crypto.subtle.generateKey(
    {
      name: "RSA-PSS",
      modulusLength: 2048,
      publicExponent: new Uint8Array([1, 0, 1]),
      hash: "SHA-256",
    },
    true,
    ["sign", "verify"],
  );

  const data = crypto.getRandomValues(new Uint8Array(16));
  const algorithm = { name: "RSA-PSS", saltLength: 20 };
  const sig = await crypto.subtle.sign(algorithm, keyPair.privateKey, data);

  assert(await crypto.subtle.verify(algorithm, keyPair.publicKey, sig, data));
  assertEquals(
    await crypto.subtle.verify(
      { ...algorithm, saltLength: 32 },
      keyPair.publicKey,
      sig,
      data,
    ),
    false,
  );
});

[kylewillmon]

That may be a valid test. But it fails on main and this patch has no affect on it.

The salt length is not needed during verification because it can be determined from the signature. And as far as I can tell, the rsa crate does not have a way to validate the salt length during verification (in either the current or previous version).

[panva]

You're correct that this indeed also happens on main too. That does not however make this an acceptable state. I've opened an issue to track this.

[kylewillmon]

That does not however make this an acceptable state.

I agree. My point was simply that it should not hold up this PR as this patch does not make the issue any better or worse.

[kylewillmon]

I don't think this patch is causing the benchmark failure. Maybe that just needs to be re-run?

[kylewillmon]

Is there anything that I should do to help move this PR forward?

[crowlKats]

@kylewillmon could you rebase?

[kylewillmon]

@crowlKats Done. Let me know if anything else is needed.