Fix create_ak for ECC keys

[ionut-arm]

Fixing the parameters for creating AKs in the Endorsement Hierarchy. The count value part of the EccScheme has been adjusted, and an empty EccPoint was added as unique identifier for the key.

[wiktor-k]

Looks good 👍

Is there a test case for EcDaa already? (so that both codepaths are tested).

[ionut-arm]

I'm curious now why that ecc_rsa test was supposed to fail 🤔

EDIT: nevermind, noticed the scheme... why does it work with swtpm, though....

[wiktor-k]

EDIT: nevermind, noticed the scheme... why does it work with swtpm, though....

I think a better explanation in the test would be a good idea. Also, instead of manual panic: #[should_panic] maybe even with expected...

Just throwing some random work ideas your way 😅

[Superhepper]

I don't understand this panic. Should you not test that the correct error is generated instead?

[wiktor-k]

I guess Ionut did so because I suggested it in a previous comment. Sorry 🙇‍♂️! Maybe indeed assert!(matches!(... would be a better option 🤔

[Superhepper]

I mean for me #[should_panic] is used to test that the library panics under certain conditions. And we try very hard to not panic any where in the library so that should hopefully not happen.

Things that one can do to test is:

1. If the error in it self is not that import but rather that an error is returned at all then you can:

let result = ak::foo();
assert!(result.is_err(), "Function fo should have returned an error.");

This is not done any where in our code currently because the returned errors are a part of the API.

2. The specific error is important:

let result = ak::foo();
if let Err(actual_error) = result {
    assert_eq!(
        Error::WrapperError(WrapperErrorKind::InvalidParam),
        actual_error,
        "Foo did not produce the expected error."
    );
} else {
    panic!("Foo is expected to return an error");
}

This is done extensively when testing the TSS return code errors.

[ionut-arm]

Thanks for the pushback, should've thought this through 😅

I'll tweak it and push back up.

[ionut-arm]

Right, only took about 3 months, hope it works!

[Firstyear]

What should we do to unblock this pr?

[Superhepper]

I do not think it is blocked I just think @ionut-arm has been busy and not been able to work on this. I think we decided to not use the #[should_panic]. So we are just waiting for him to re write the test to check that the correct error is being generated and this should be good to be merged.

[Superhepper]

@ionut-arm Tell me if you need any help with this. I can fix the tests for you if you like.

[ionut-arm]

@ionut-arm Tell me if you need any help with this. I can fix the tests for you if you like.

ok, finally got to this... @Firstyear - apologies for the long wait, I reckon this is ready to go (pending approval, of course)