This unifies a bunch of tests and also adds a few missing ones.
Change-Id: I91652bd010da6cdb62168ce0a3415737127e1577
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8360
Reviewed-by: Nick Harper <nharper@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
In TLS, you never skip the Certificate message. It may be empty, but its
presence is determined by CertificateRequest. (This is sensible.)
In SSL 3.0, the client omits the Certificate message. This means you need to
probe and may receive either Certificate or ClientKeyExchange (thankfully,
ClientKeyExchange is not optional, or we'd have to probe at ChangeCipherSpec).
We didn't have test coverage for this, despite some of this logic being a
little subtle asynchronously. Fix this.
Change-Id: I149490ae5506f02fa0136cb41f8fea381637bf45
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/7419
Reviewed-by: Steven Valdez <svaldez@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
This is a minor regression from
https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/5235.
If the client, for whatever reason, had an ID-based session but also
supports tickets, it will send non-empty ID + empty ticket extension.
If the ticket extension is non-empty, then the ID is not an ID but a
dummy signaling value, so 5235 avoided looking it up. But if it is
present and empty, the ID is still an ID and should be looked up.
This shouldn't have any practical consequences, except if a server
switched from not supporting tickets and then started supporting it,
while keeping the session cache fixed.
Add a test for this case, and tighten up existing ID vs ticket tests so
they fail if we resume with the wrong type.
Change-Id: Id4d08cd809af00af30a2b67fe3a971078e404c75
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/6554
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <alangley@gmail.com>
RFC 5746 forbids a server from downgrading or upgrading
renegotiation_info support. Even with SSL_OP_LEGACY_SERVER_CONNECT set
(the default), we can still enforce a few things.
I do not believe this has practical consequences. The attack variant
where the server half is prefixed does not involve a renegotiation on
the client. The converse where the client sees the renegotiation and
prefix does, but we only support renego for the mid-stream HTTP/1.1
client auth hack, which doesn't do this. (And with triple-handshake,
HTTPS clients should be requiring the certificate be unchanged across
renego which makes this moot.)
Ultimately, an application which makes the mistake of using
renegotiation needs to be aware of what exactly that means and how to
handle connection state changing mid-stream. We make renego opt-in now,
so this is a tenable requirement.
(Also the legacy -> secure direction would have been caught by the
server anyway since we send a non-empty RI extension.)
Change-Id: I915965c342f8a9cf3a4b6b32f0a87a00c3df3559
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/6559
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
SSL 3.0 used to have a nice and simple rule around extensions. They don't
exist. And then RFC 5746 came along and made this all extremely confusing.
In an SSL 3.0 server, rather than blocking ServerHello extension
emission when renegotiation_info is missing, ignore all ClientHello
extensions but renegotiation_info. This avoids a mismatch between local
state and the extensions with emit.
Notably if, for some reason, a ClientHello includes the session_ticket
extension, does NOT include renegotiation_info or the SCSV, and yet the
client or server are decrepit enough to negotiate SSL 3.0, the
connection will fail due to unexpected NewSessionTicket message.
See https://crbug.com/425979#c9 for a discussion of something similar
that came up in diagnosing https://poodle.io/'s buggy POODLE check.
This is analogous to upstream's
5a3d8eebb7667b32af0ccc3f12f314df6809d32d.
(Not supporting renego as a server in any form anyway, we may as well
completely ignore extensions, but then our extensions callbacks can't
assume the parse hooks are always called. This way the various NULL
handlers still function.)
Change-Id: Ie689a0e9ffb0369ef7a20ab4231005e87f32d5f8
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/6180
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
This change makes the runner tests (in ssl/test/runner) act like a
normal Go test rather than being a Go binary. This better aligns with
some internal tools.
Thus, from this point onwards, one has to run the runner tests with `go
test` rather than `go run` or `go build && ./runner`.
This will break the bots.
Change-Id: Idd72c31e8e0c2b7ed9939dacd3b801dbd31710dd
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/6009
Reviewed-by: Matt Braithwaite <mab@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
SCT and OCSP are part of the session data and as such shouldn't be sent
again to the client when resuming.
Change-Id: Iaee3a3c4c167ea34b91504929e38aadee37da572
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/5900
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Change-Id: Ifa44fef160fc9d67771eed165f8fc277f28a0222
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/5840
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
I don't think we had coverage for this check.
Change-Id: I5e454e69c1ee9f1b9760d2ef1431170d76f78d63
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/5544
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
This change mirrors upstream's custom extension API because we have some
internal users that depend on it.
Change-Id: I408e442de0a55df7b05c872c953ff048cd406513
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/5471
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
This change also switches the behaviour of the client. Previously the
client would send the SCSV rather than the extension, but now it'll only
do that for SSLv3 connections.
Change-Id: I67a04b8abbef2234747c0dac450458deb6b0cd0a
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/5143
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Make sure we don't break that on accident.
Change-Id: I22d58d35170d43375622fe61e4a588d1d626a054
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/4960
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
The only case where renego is supported is if we are a client and the
server sends a HelloRequest. That is still needed to support the renego
+ client auth hack in Chrome. Beyond that, no other forms of renego will
work.
The messy logic where the handshake loop is repurposed to send
HelloRequest and the extremely confusing tri-state s->renegotiate (which
makes SSL_renegotiate_pending a lie during the initial handshake as a
server) are now gone. The next change will further simplify things by
removing ssl->s3->renegotiate and the renego deferral logic. There's
also some server-only renegotiation checks that can go now.
Also clean up ssl3_read_bytes' HelloRequest handling. The old logic relied on
the handshake state machine to reject bad HelloRequests which... actually that
code probably lets you initiate renego by sending the first four bytes of a
ServerHello and expecting the peer to read it later.
BUG=429450
Change-Id: Ie0f87d0c2b94e13811fe8e22e810ab2ffc8efa6c
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/4824
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
This cuts down on one config knob as well as one case in the renego
combinatorial explosion. Since the only case we care about with renego
is the client auth hack, there's no reason to ever do resumption.
Especially since, no matter what's in the session cache:
- OpenSSL will only ever offer the session it just established,
whether or not a newer one with client auth was since established.
- Chrome will never cache sessions created on a renegotiation, so
such a session would never make it to the session cache.
- The new_session + SSL_OP_NO_SESSION_RESUMPTION_ON_RENEGOTIATION
logic had a bug where it would unconditionally never offer tickets
(but would advertise support) on renego, so any server doing renego
resumption against an OpenSSL-derived client must not support
session tickets.
This also gets rid of s->new_session which is now pointless.
BUG=429450
Change-Id: I884bdcdc80bff45935b2c429b4bbc9c16b2288f8
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/4732
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
See upstream's bd891f098bdfcaa285c073ce556d0f5e27ec3a10. It honestly seems
kinda dumb for a client to do this, but apparently the spec allows this.
Judging by code inspection, OpenSSL 1.0.1 also allowed this, so this avoids a
behavior change when switching from 1.0.1 to BoringSSL.
Add a test for this, which revealed that, unlike upstream's version, this
actually works with ecdh_auto since tls1_get_shared_curve also needs updating.
(To be mentioned in newsletter.)
Change-Id: Ie622700f17835965457034393b90f346740cfca8
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/4464
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
That's a pretty obvious thing to test. I'm not sure how we forgot that one.
Change-Id: I7e1a7df6c6abbdd587e0f7723117f50d09faa5c4
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/4211
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Both on the client and the server.
Change-Id: I9892c6dbbb29938154aba4f53b10e8b5231f9c47
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/4071
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
This is really just scar tissue with https://crbug.com/468889 being the real
underlying problem. But the test is pretty easy.
Change-Id: I5eca18fdcbde8665c0e6c3ac419a28152647d66f
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/4052
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
In verifying the fix for CVE-2015-0291, I noticed we don't actually have any
test coverage for full handshakes on renegotiation. All our tests always do
resumptions.
Change-Id: Ia9b701e8a50ba9353fefb8cc4fb86e78065d0b40
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/4050
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
This mostly[*] doesn't matter for TLS since the message would have been
rejected anyway, but, in DTLS, if the peer rejects our Finished, it will send
an encrypted alert. This will then cause it to hang, which isn't very helpful.
I've made the change on both TLS and DTLS so the two protocols don't diverge on
this point. It is true that we're accepting nominally encrypted and
authenticated alerts before Finished, but, prior to ChangeCipherSpec, the
alerts are sent in the clear anyway so an attacker could already inject alerts.
A consumer could only be sensitive to it being post-CCS if it was watching
msg_callback. The only non-debug consumer of msg_callback I've found anywhere
is some hostapd code to detect Heartbeat.
See https://code.google.com/p/webrtc/issues/detail?id=4403 for an instance
where the equivalent behavior in OpenSSL masks an alert.
[*] This does change behavior slightly if the peer sends a warning alert
between CCS and Finished. I believe this is benign as warning alerts are
usually ignored apart from info_callback and msg_callback. The one exception is
a close_notify which is a slightly new state (accepting close_notify during a
handshake seems questionable...), but they're processed pre-CCS too.
Change-Id: Idd0d49b9f9aa9d35374a9f5e2f815cdb931f5254
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/3883
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
We actually don't really care about this special-case since we only test client
full handshakes where the runner sends the second Finished not the shim
(otherwise the overlap logic and retransmitting on every fragment would
probably break us), but it should probably live next to the fragmentation
logic.
Change-Id: I54097d84ad8294bc6c42a84d6f22f496e63eb2a8
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/3763
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
This is consistent with ignoring writeRecord failures. Without doing this, the
DTLS MinimumVersion test now flakily fails with:
FAILED (MinimumVersion-Client-TLS12-TLS1-DTLS)
bad error (wanted ':UNSUPPORTED_PROTOCOL:' / 'remote error: protocol version not supported'): local error 'write unix @: broken pipe', child error 'exit status 2', stdout:
2092242157:error:1007b1a7:SSL routines:ssl3_get_server_hello:UNSUPPORTED_PROTOCOL:../ssl/s3_clnt.c:783:
This is because the MinimumVersion tests assert on /both/ expectedError and
expectedLocalError. The latter is valuable as it asserts on the alert the peer
returned. (I would like us to add more such assertions to our tests where
appropriate.) However, after we send ServerHello, we also send a few messages
following it. This races with the peer shutdown and we sometimes get EPIPE
before reading the alert.
Change-Id: I3fe37940a6a531379673a00976035f8e76e0f825
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/3337
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
This works fine, but I believe NSS had a bug here a couple years ago. Also move
all the Skip* bug options next to each other in order.
Change-Id: I72dcb3babeee7ba73b3d7dc5ebef2e2298e37438
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/3333
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
For now, only test reorderings when we always or never fragment messages.
There's a third untested case: when full messages and fragments are mixed. That
will be tested later after making it actually work.
Change-Id: Ic4efb3f5e87b1319baf2d4af31eafa40f6a50fa6
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/3216
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
This extends the packet adaptor protocol to send three commands:
type command =
| Packet of []byte
| Timeout of time.Duration
| TimeoutAck
When the shim processes a Timeout in BIO_read, it sends TimeoutAck, fails the
BIO_read, returns out of the SSL stack, advances the clock, calls
DTLSv1_handle_timeout, and continues.
If the Go side sends Timeout right between sending handshake flight N and
reading flight N+1, the shim won't read the Timeout until it has sent flight
N+1 (it only processes packet commands in BIO_read), so the TimeoutAck comes
after N+1. Go then drops all packets before the TimeoutAck, thus dropping one
transmit of flight N+1 without having to actually process the packets to
determine the end of the flight. The shim then sees the updated clock, calls
DTLSv1_handle_timeout, and re-sends flight N+1 for Go to process for real.
When dropping packets, Go checks the epoch and increments sequence numbers so
that we can continue to be strict here. This requires tracking the initial
sequence number of the next epoch.
The final Finished message takes an additional special-case to test. DTLS
triggers retransmits on either a timeout or seeing a stale flight. OpenSSL only
implements the former which should be sufficient (and is necessary) EXCEPT for
the final Finished message. If the peer's final Finished message is lost, it
won't be waiting for a message from us, so it won't time out anything. That
retransmit must be triggered on stale message, so we retransmit the Finished
message in Go.
Change-Id: I3ffbdb1de525beb2ee831b304670a3387877634c
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/3212
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
This is fatal for TLS but buffered in DTLS. The buffering isn't strictly
necessary (it would be just as valid to drop the record on the floor), but so
long as we want this behavior it should have a test.
Change-Id: I5846bb2fe80d78e25b6dfad51bcfcff2dc427c3f
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/3029
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
The comment has it right, but the rewritten code was wrong.
Change-Id: I450193c39fb62eae32aae090a3834dd83db53421
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/2444
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
This implements session IDs in client and server in runner.go.
Change-Id: I26655f996b7b44c7eb56340ef6a415d3f2ac3503
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/2350
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Just the negotiation portion as everything else is external. This feature is
used in WebRTC.
Change-Id: Iccc3983ea99e7d054b59010182f9a56a8099e116
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/2310
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
These'll get removed once most of renego support is gone, but this is to prove
removing the warning alert from the previous commit still prevents legacy
renegotiations.
Change-Id: I7d9d95e1d4c5d23d3b6d170938a5499a65f2d5ea
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/2236
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
This change adds support to the Go code for renegotiation as a client,
meaning that we can test BoringSSL's renegotiation as a server.
Change-Id: Iaa9fb1a6022c51023bce36c47d4ef7abee74344b
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/2082
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Only the three plain PSK suites for now. ECDHE_PSK_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 will
be in a follow-up.
Change-Id: Iafc116a5b2798c61d90c139b461cf98897ae23b3
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/2051
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Maintain a handshake buffer in prf.go to implement TLS 1.2 client auth. Also
use it for SSL 3. This isn't strictly necessary as we know the hash functions,
but Go's hash.Hash interface lacks a Copy method.
Also fix the server-side tests which failed to test every TLS version.
Change-Id: I98492c334fbb9f2f0f89ee9c5c8345cafc025600
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/1664
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
RFC 6347 changed the meaning of server_version in HelloVerifyRequest. It should
now always be 1.0 with version negotiation not happening until ServerHello. Fix
runner.go logic and remove #if-0'd code in dtls1_get_hello_verify.
Enforce this in the runner for when we get DTLS 1.2 tests.
Change-Id: Ice83628798a231df6bf268f66b4c47b14a519386
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/1552
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
The missing SSL 3.0 client support in runner.go was fairly minor.
Change-Id: Ibbd440c9b6be99be08a214dec6b93ca358d8cf0a
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/1516
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Run against openssl s_client and openssl s_server. This seems to work for a
start, although it may need to become cleverer to stress more of BoringSSL's
implementation for test purposes.
In particular, it assumes a reliable, in-order channel. And it requires that
the peer send handshake fragments in order. Retransmit and whatnot are not
implemented. The peer under test will be expected to handle a lossy channel,
but all loss in the channel will be controlled. MAC errors, etc., are fatal.
Change-Id: I329233cfb0994938fd012667ddf7c6a791ac7164
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/1390
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
ssl23_get_client_hello has lots of remnants of SSLv2 support and remnants of an
even older SSL_OP_NON_EXPORT_FIRST option (see upstream's
d92f0bb6e9ed94ac0c3aa0c939f2565f2ed95935) which complicates the logic.
Split it into three states and move V2ClientHello parsing into its own
function. Port it to CBS and CBB to give bounds checks on the V2ClientHello
parse.
This fixes a minor bug where, if the SSL_accept call in ssl23_get_client_hello
failed, cb would not be NULL'd and SSL_CB_ACCEPT_LOOP would get reported an
extra time.
It also unbreaks the invariant between s->packet, s->packet_length,
s->s3->rbuf.buf, and s->s3->rbuf.offset at the point the switch, although this
was of no consequence because the first ssl3_read_n call passes extend = 0
which resets s->packet and s->packet_length.
It also makes us tolerant to major version bumps in the ClientHello. Add tests
for TLS tolerance of both minor and major version bumps as well as the HTTP
request error codes.
Change-Id: I948337f4dc483f4ebe1742d3eba53b045b260257
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/1455
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Assert that inappropriate fallbacks are detected, but if the client_version
matches the server's highest version, do not abort the handshake.
Change-Id: I9d72570bce45e1eb23fc2b74a3c5fca10562e573
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/1373
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Should have test coverage there as long as we care about supporting it.
Change-Id: Ic67539228b550f2ebd0b543d5a58640913b0474b
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/1371
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
