This adds the machinery for doing TLS 1.3 1RTT.
Change-Id: I736921ffe9dc6f6e64a08a836df6bb166d20f504
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8720
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
CQ-Verified: CQ bot account: commit-bot@chromium.org <commit-bot@chromium.org>
Not only test that we can enforce the message type correctly (this is
currently in protocol-specific code though really should not be), but
also test that each individual message is checked correctly.
Change-Id: I5ed0f4033f011186f020ea46940160c7639f688b
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8793
Reviewed-by: Steven Valdez <svaldez@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
CQ-Verified: CQ bot account: commit-bot@chromium.org <commit-bot@chromium.org>
This will be used for writing the equivalent test in TLS 1.3 to the
recent DTLS change and similar.
Change-Id: I280c3ca8f1d8e0981b6e7a499acb7eceebe43a0c
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8792
Reviewed-by: Steven Valdez <svaldez@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
CQ-Verified: CQ bot account: commit-bot@chromium.org <commit-bot@chromium.org>
This is the equivalent of FragmentAcrossChangeCipherSuite for DTLS. It
is possible for us to, while receiving pre-CCS handshake messages, to
buffer up a message with sequence number meant for a post-CCS Finished.
When we then get to the new epoch and attempt to read the Finished, we
will process the buffered Finished although it was sent with the wrong
encryption.
Move ssl_set_{read,write}_state to SSL_PROTOCOL_METHOD hooks as this is
a property of the transport. Notably, read_state may fail. In DTLS
check the handshake buffer size. We could place this check in
read_change_cipher_spec, but TLS 1.3 has no ChangeCipherSpec message, so
we will need to implement this at the cipher change point anyway. (For
now, there is only an assert on the TLS side. This will be replaced with
a proper check in TLS 1.3.)
Change-Id: Ia52b0b81e7db53e9ed2d4f6d334a1cce13e93297
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8790
Reviewed-by: Steven Valdez <svaldez@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
CQ-Verified: CQ bot account: commit-bot@chromium.org <commit-bot@chromium.org>
Change-Id: I2f5c45e0e491f9dd25c2463710697599fea708ed
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8794
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
CQ-Verified: CQ bot account: commit-bot@chromium.org <commit-bot@chromium.org>
The server must switch the outgoing keys early so that client
certificate alerts are sent with the right keys. (Also so that half-RTT
data may be sent.)
Change-Id: Id5482c811aa0b747ab646453b3856a83f23d3f06
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8791
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
CQ-Verified: CQ bot account: commit-bot@chromium.org <commit-bot@chromium.org>
The TLS 1.3 CertificateRequest code advertised the signing set, not the
verify set. It also wasn't saving the peer's signature algorithm.
Change-Id: I62247d5703e30d8463c92f3d597dbeb403b355ae
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8774
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Tested against the C code.
Change-Id: I62639e1e46cd4f57625be5d4ff7f6902b318c278
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8768
Reviewed-by: Steven Valdez <svaldez@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
We need EnableAllCiphers to make progress so, temporarily, defer the PSK
error. Also flip a true/false bug in the OCSP stapling logic.
Change-Id: Iad597c84393e1400c42b8b290eedc16f73f5ed30
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8766
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Steven Valdez <svaldez@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
In preparation for getting the tests going.
Change-Id: Ifd2ab09e6ce91f99abde759d5db8dc6554521572
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8764
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Steven Valdez <svaldez@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Tested by having client and server talk to each other. This adds the
certificate_extensions field to CertificateRequest which I'd previously
missed. (We completely ignore the field, with the expectation that the C
code won't have anything useful to do with it either.)
Change-Id: I74f96acd36747d4b6a6f533535e36ea8e94d2be8
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8710
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
[Originally written by nharper, revised by davidben.]
Change-Id: If1d45c33994476f4bc9cd69831b6bbed40f792d0
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8599
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
For now, skip the 1.2 -> 1.1 signal since that will affect shipping
code. We may as well enable it too, but wait until things have settled
down. This implements the version in draft-14 since draft-13's isn't
backwards-compatible.
Change-Id: I46be43e6f4c5203eb4ae006d1c6a2fe7d7a949ec
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8724
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Saves worrying about forgetting it. (And indeed I forgot it in the TLS
1.3 code.)
Change-Id: Ibb55a83eddba675da64b7cf2c45eac6348c97784
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8722
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>
[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>
TLS 1.3 will use a different function from processClientHello.
Change-Id: I8b26a601cf553834b508feab051927d5986091ca
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8597
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
As with the client, the logic around extensions in 1.3 will want to be
tweaked. readClientHello will probably shrink a bit. (We could probably
stuff 1.3 into the existing parameter negotiation logic, but I expect
it'll get a bit unwieldy once HelloRetryRequest, PSK resumption, and
0-RTT get in there, so I think it's best we leave them separate.)
Change-Id: Id8c323a06a1def6857a59accd9f87fb0b088385a
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8596
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>
[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>
The specification, sadly, did not say that servers MUST NOT send it, only that
they are "not expected to" do anything with the client extension. Accordingly,
we decided to tolerate this. Add a test for this so that we check this
behavior.
This test also ensures that the original session's value for it carries over.
Change-Id: I38c738f218a09367c9d8d1b0c4d68ab5cbec730e
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/7860
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@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>
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>
RFC 5077 explicitly allows the server to change its mind and send no
ticket by sending an empty NewSessionTicket. See also upstream's
21b538d616b388fa0ce64ef54da3504253895cf8.
CBS_stow handles this case somewhat, so we won't get confused about
malloc(0) as upstream did. But we'll still fill in a bogus SHA-256
session ID, cache the session, and send a ClientHello with bogus session
ID but empty ticket extension. (The session ID field changes meaning
significantly when the ticket is or isn't empty. Non-empty means "ignore
the session ID, but echo if it resuming" while empty means "I support
tickets, but am offering this session ID".
The other behavior change is that a server which changes its mind on a
resumption handshake will no longer override the client's session cache
with a ticket-less session.
(This is kind of silly. Given that we don't get completely confused due
to CBS_stow, it might not be worth bothering with the rest. Mostly it
bugged me that we send an indicator session ID with no ticket.)
Change-Id: Id6b5bde1fe51aa3e1f453a948e59bfd1e2502db6
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/6340
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <alangley@gmail.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>
Allow configuring digest preferences for the private key. Some
smartcards have limited support for signing digests, notably Windows
CAPI keys and old Estonian smartcards. Chromium used the supports_digest
hook in SSL_PRIVATE_KEY_METHOD to limit such keys to SHA1. However,
detecting those keys was a heuristic, so some SHA256-capable keys
authenticating to SHA256-only servers regressed in the switch to
BoringSSL. Replace this mechanism with an API to configure digest
preference order. This way heuristically-detected SHA1-only keys may be
configured by Chromium as SHA1-preferring rather than SHA1-requiring.
In doing so, clean up the shared_sigalgs machinery somewhat.
BUG=468076
Change-Id: I996a2df213ae4d8b4062f0ab85b15262ca26f3c6
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/5755
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
If the two extensions select different next protocols (quite possible since one
is server-selected and the other is client-selected), things will break. This
matches the behavior of NSS (Firefox) and Go.
Change-Id: Ie1da97bf062b91a370c85c12bc61423220a22f36
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/5780
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
That got out of sync at some point.
Change-Id: I5a45f50f330ceb65053181afc916053a80aa2c5d
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/5541
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>
Fastradio was a trick where the ClientHello was padding to at least 1024
bytes in order to trick some mobile radios into entering high-power mode
immediately. After experimentation, the feature is being dropped.
This change also tidies up a bit of the extensions code now that
everything is using the new system.
Change-Id: Icf7892e0ac1fbe5d66a5d7b405ec455c6850a41c
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/5466
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
The NULL checks later on notice, but failing with
SSL_R_UNABLE_TO_FIND_PUBLIC_KEY_PARAMETERS on accident is confusing.
Require that the message be non-empty.
Change-Id: Iddfac6a3ae6e6dc66c3de41d3bb26e133c0c6e1d
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/5046
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Since we hope to eventually lose server-side renegotiation support
altogether, get the client-side version of those tests. We should have
had those anyway to test that the default is to allow it.
BUG=429450
Change-Id: I4a18f339b55f3f07d77e22e823141e10a12bc9ff
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/4780
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>
Because RFC 6066 is obnoxious like that and IIS servers actually do this
when OCSP-stapling is configured, but the OCSP server cannot be reached.
BUG=478947
Change-Id: I3d34c1497e0b6b02d706278dcea5ceb684ff60ae
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/4461
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
After sharding the session cache for fallbacks, the numbers have been pretty
good; 0.03% on dev and 0.02% on canary. Stable is at 0.06% but does not have
the sharded session cache. Before sharding, stable, beta, and dev had been
fairly closely aligned. Between 0.03% being low and the fallback saving us in
all but extremely contrived cases, I think this should be fairly safe.
Add tests for both the cipher suite and protocol version mismatch checks.
BUG=441456
Change-Id: I2374bf64d0aee0119f293d207d45319c274d89ab
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/3972
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Extend the False Start tests to optionally send an alert (thus avoiding
deadlock) before waiting for the out-of-order app data. Based on whether the
peer shuts off the connection before or after sending app data, we can
determine whether the peer False Started by observing purely external effects.
Change-Id: I8b9fecc29668e0b0c34b5fd19d0f239545011bae
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/4213
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>
