Now that the odd client/server split (a remnant from the original
crypto/tls code not handling signing-hash/PRF mismatches) is gone, it
can just be pulled from the config.
Change-Id: Idb46c026d6529a2afc2b43d4afedc0aa950614db
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8723
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
This way we can test failing client auth without having to worry about
first getting through server auth.
Change-Id: Iaf996d87ac3df702a17e76c26006ca9b2a5bdd1f
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8721
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Implement in both C and Go. To test this, route config into all the
sign.go functions so we can expose bugs to skip the check.
Unfortunately, custom private keys are going to be a little weird since
we can't check their curve type. We may need to muse on what to do here.
Perhaps the key type bit should return an enum that includes the curve?
It's weird because, going forward, hopefully all new key types have
exactly one kind of signature so key type == sig alg == sig alg prefs.
Change-Id: I1f487ec143512ead931e3392e8be2a3172abe3d2
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8701
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
{sha256,ecdsa} should not be silently accepted for an RSA key.
Change-Id: I0c0eea5071f7a59f2707ca0ea023a16cc4126d6a
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8697
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
For when the PackHandshakeFlight tests get enabled.
Change-Id: Iee20fd27d88ed58f59af3b7e2dd92235d35af9ce
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8663
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
[Originally written by nharper, revised by davidben.]
When we add this in the real code, this will want ample tests and hooks
for bugs, but get the core logic in to start with.
Change-Id: I86cf0b6416c9077dbb6471a1802ae984b8fa6c72
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8598
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
While the random connection property extensions like ALPN and SRTP
remain largely unchanged in TLS 1.3 (but for interaction with 0-RTT),
authentication-related extensions change significantly and need
dedicated logic.
Change-Id: I2588935c2563a22e9879fb81478b8df5168b43de
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8602
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Test with and without PackHandshakeFlight enabled to cover when the
early post-CCS fragment will get packed into one of the pre-CCS
handshake records. Also test the resumption cases too to cover more
state transitions.
The various CCS-related tests (since CCS is kind of a mess) are pulled
into their own group.
Change-Id: I6384f2fb28d9885cd2b06d59e765e080e3822d8a
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8661
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
[Originally written by nharper and then revised by davidben.]
Most features are missing, but it works for a start. To avoid breaking
the fake TLS 1.3 tests while the C code is still not landed, all the
logic is gated on a global boolean. When the C code gets in, we'll
set it to true and remove this boolean.
Change-Id: I6b3a369890864c26203fc9cda37c8250024ce91b
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8601
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
I'm surprised we'd never tested this. In addition to splitting handshake
records up, one may pack multiple handshakes into a single record, as
they fit. Generalize the DTLS handshake flush hook to do this in TLS as
well.
Change-Id: Ia546d18c7c56ba45e50f489c5b53e1fcd6404f51
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8650
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
TLS 1.2 and 1.3 will process more-or-less the same server extensions,
but at slightly different points in the handshake. In preparation for
that, split this out into its own function.
Change-Id: I5494dee4724295794dfd13c5e9f9f83eade6b20a
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8586
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
TLS 1.2 and 1.3 will both need to call it at different points.
Change-Id: Id62ec289213aa6c06ebe5fe65a57ca6c2b53d538
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8600
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
TLS 1.3 will need to call it under different circumstances. We will also
wish to test TLS 1.3 post-handshake auth, so this function must work
without being passed handshake state.
In doing so, implement matching based on signature algorithms as 1.3
does away with the certificate type list.
Change-Id: Ibdee44bbbb589686fcbcd7412432100279bfac63
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8589
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
[Originally written by nharper, tweaked by davidben.]
In TLS 1.3, every extension the server previously sent gets moved to a
separate EncryptedExtensions message. To be able to share code between
the two, parse those extensions separately. For now, the handshake reads
from serverHello.extensions.foo, though later much of the extensions
logic will probably handle serverExtensions independent of whether it
resides in ServerHello or EncryptedExtensions.
Change-Id: I07aaae6df3ef6fbac49e64661d14078d0dbeafb0
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8584
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
TLS 1.3 defines its own EncryptedExtensions message. The existing one is
for Channel ID which probably should not have tried to generalize
itself.
Change-Id: I4f48bece98510eb54e64fbf3df6c2a7332bc0261
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8566
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Right now I believe we are testing against DTLS 1.3 ClientHellos. Fix
this in preparation for making VersionTLS13 go elsewhere in the Go code.
Unfortunately, I made the mistake of mapping DTLS 1.0 to TLS 1.0 rather
than 1.1 in Go. This does mean the names of the tests naturally work out
correctly, but we have to deal with this awkward DTLS-1.1-shaped hole in
our logic.
Change-Id: I8715582ed90acc1f08197831cae6de8d5442d028
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8562
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
TLS 1.3 defines a new SignatureScheme uint16 enum that is backwards
compatible on the wire with TLS1.2's SignatureAndHashAlgorithm. This
change updates the go testing code to use a single signatureAlgorithm
enum (instead of 2 separate signature and hash enums) in preparation for
TLS 1.3. It also unifies all the signing around this new scheme,
effectively backporting the change to TLS 1.2.
For now, it does not distinguish signature algorithms between 1.2 and
1.3 (RSA-PSS instead of RSA-PKCS1, ECDSA must match curve types). When
the C code is ready make a similar change, the Go code will be updated
to match.
[Originally written by nharper, tweaked significantly by davidben.]
Change-Id: If9a315c4670755089ac061e4ec254ef3457a00de
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8450
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
This implements the cipher suite constraints in "fake TLS 1.3". It also makes
bssl_shim and runner enable it by default so we can start adding MaxVersion:
VersionTLS12 markers to tests as 1.2 vs. 1.3 differences begin to take effect.
Change-Id: If1caf6e43938c8d15b0a0f39f40963b8199dcef5
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8340
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
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>
