Challenge is expected in timestamp token in case 2
In the second case out of the two cases of authorization enforcement
described for update(), it seems like the challenge is expected in
the timestamp token.
Test: N/A
Change-Id: I33e1b84bf8218335665b31ca144b3b4ecb342328
diff --git a/security/keymint/aidl/android/hardware/security/keymint/IKeyMintOperation.aidl b/security/keymint/aidl/android/hardware/security/keymint/IKeyMintOperation.aidl
index 82c8a0d..a4fab55 100644
--- a/security/keymint/aidl/android/hardware/security/keymint/IKeyMintOperation.aidl
+++ b/security/keymint/aidl/android/hardware/security/keymint/IKeyMintOperation.aidl
@@ -126,8 +126,8 @@
*
* o The HMAC field must validate correctly.
*
- * o The challenge field in the auth token must contain the challenge value contained in the
- * BeginResult returned from IKeyMintDevice::begin().
+ * o The challenge field in the timestamp token must contain the challenge value contained in
+ * the BeginResult returned from IKeyMintDevice::begin().
*
* The resulting secure time value is then used to authenticate the HardwareAuthToken. For the
* auth token to be valid, all of the following has to be true:
@@ -139,9 +139,6 @@
*
* o The key must have a Tag::USER_AUTH_TYPE that matches the auth type in the token.
*
- * o The challenge field in the auth token must contain the challenge value contained in the
- * BeginResult returned from IKeyMintDevice::begin().
- *
* o The timestamp in the auth token plus the value of the Tag::AUTH_TIMEOUT must be greater
* than the provided secure timestamp.