Update wycheproof testvectors to v1

[Sajjon]

Update some Wycheproof testvectors (v0) to new testvectors_v1, which in general include more tests per file.

Checklist

• I've run tests to see all new and existing tests pass
• I've followed the code style of the rest of the project
• I've read the Contribution Guidelines
• I've updated the documentation if necessary

If you've made changes to gyb files

• I've run .script/generate_boilerplate_files_with_gyb and included updated generated files in a commit of this pull request

Motivation:

We ought to use as many and as up to date test vectors as possible. Wycheproofs v0 were created 4 years ago and were due some upgrade.

Modification & Result

(I took the liberty to merge these to sections together)

More tests are now run 🎉 below is a table over all changes and result.

Testvector	Previous name	V0 number of tests	V1 number of tests	Source code unchanged?	Test code unchanged?
x25519_test	unchanged	87	518	✅	✅
ed25519_test	eddsa_test	111	150	✅	JSON: changed single key
aes_gcm_test	unchanged	217	313	✅	✅
chacha20_poly1305_test	unchanged	151	325	✅	✅
ecdh_secp256r1_ecpoint_test	unchanged	99	355	✅	✅
ecdh_secp256r1_test	unchanged	340	612	✅	Logic: fatalError -> failable init

I can upgrade all...

... but I wanted to hear first that you think it a good idea...

If so, should I do it in a single PR? I.e. add more commits to this PR?

[Sajjon]

@swift-server-bot test this please

[Sajjon]

Ah maybe I lack access to trigger swift-server-bot to run tests... one can always try 😅

[Lukasa]

Good news though, I can tackle them!

[Lukasa]

@swift-server-bot test this please

[Sajjon]

@Lukasa would you be interested in me continuing with the rest of the vectors? I mean to say, if you don't think it a good idea, best I don't waste the time 😅.

If you think it it a good idea, do you prefer all upgraded in the same PR? Or split across many?

Let me know :)

[Lukasa]

Hey @Sajjon, sorry for letting this sit here. I haven't lost track of it, I promise. I think in general this is something we want to accept, but I think splitting across PRs will make life easier.

[Sajjon]

Great, I will split into multiple ones and referenced them here and then close this one. Might be some
Days before I can do that though.

Talk soon!

[Sajjon]

@Lukasa I've split this PR into six new ones, I will continue with the rest later next week. Should we have an umbrella issue for all PRs? Since they are strongly related. I can create that, and then we can close this PR.

Let me know how you wanna proceed! :)

[Lukasa]

The first 6 are merged, thanks!

[Sajjon]

Great, I can maybe do some more later this week.

[Sajjon]

Closed in favour of umbrella issue: #165