OpenSSL's internal names for the ciphers are not the standard ones and are not
easy to consistently map to the standard ones. Add an API to get the real names
out. (WebRTC wants an API to get the standard names out.)
Also change some incorrect flags on SHA-256 TLS 1.2 ciphers;
SSL_HANDSHAKE_MAC_DEFAULT and SSL_HANDSHAKE_MAC_SHA256 are the same after TLS
1.2. A TLS 1.2 cipher should be tagged explicitly with SHA-256. (This avoids
tripping a check in SSL_CIPHER_get_rfc_name which asserts that default-hash
ciphers only ever use SHA-1 or MD5 for the bulk cipher MAC.)
Change-Id: Iaec2fd4aa97df29883094d3c2ae60f0ba003bf07
This makes SSLv23_method go through DTLS_ANY_VERSION's version negotiation
logic. This allows us to get rid of duplicate ClientHello logic. For
compatibility, SSL_METHOD is now split into SSL_PROTOCOL_METHOD and a version.
The legacy version-locked methods set min_version and max_version based this
version field to emulate the original semantics.
As a bonus, we can now handle fragmented ClientHello versions now.
Because SSLv23_method is a silly name, deprecate that too and introduce
TLS_method.
Change-Id: I8b3df2b427ae34c44ecf972f466ad64dc3dbb171
There's not much point in retaining the identity hint in the SSL_SESSION. This
avoids the complexity around setting psk_identity hint on either the SSL or the
SSL_SESSION. Introduce a peer_psk_identity_hint for the client to store the one
received from the server.
This changes the semantics of SSL_get_psk_identity_hint; it now only returns
the value configured for the server. The client learns the hint through the
callback. This is compatible with the one use of this API in conscrypt (it
pulls the hint back out to pass to a callback).
Change-Id: I6d9131636b47f13ac5800b4451436a057021054a
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/2213
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Deprecate the old two-pass version of the function. If the ticket is too long,
replace it with a placeholder value but keep the connection working.
Change-Id: Ib9fdea66389b171862143d79b5540ea90a9bd5fb
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/2011
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Doing some archeaology, since the initial OpenSSL commit, key_arg has been
omitted from the serialization if key_arg_length was 0. Since this is an
SSLv2-only field and resuming an SSLv2 session with SSLv3+ is not possible,
there is no need to support parsing those sessions.
Interestingly, it is actually not the case that key_arg_length was only ever
set in SSLv2, historically. In the initial commit of OpenSSL, SSLeay 0.8.1b,
key_arg was used to store what appears to be the IV. That was then removed in
the next commit, an import of SSLeay 0.9.0b, at which point key_arg was only
ever set in SSLv3. That is old enough that there is certainly no need to
parse pre-SSLeay-0.9.0b sessions...
Change-Id: Ia768a2d97ddbe60309be20e2efe488640c4776d9
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/2050
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
+ and - should also be forbidden. Any operation other than appending will mix
up the in_group bits and give unexpected behavior.
Change-Id: Ieaebb9ee6393aa36243d0765e45cae667f977ef5
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/1803
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
It's just checking some constants. Also the comment's off now.
Change-Id: I934d32b76c705758ae7c18009d867e9820a4c5a8
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/1800
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Otherwise, in C, it becomes a K&R function declaration which doesn't actually
type-check the number of arguments.
Change-Id: I0731a9fefca46fb1c266bfb1c33d464cf451a22e
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/1582
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
SSL reason codes corresponding to alerts have special values. Teach
make_errors.go that values above 1000 are reserved (otherwise it will assign
new values in that namespace). Also fix all the existing reason codes which
corresponded to alerts.
Change-Id: Ieabdf8fd59f4802938616934e1d84e659227cf84
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/1212
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
