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>
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 also adds a missing check to the C half to ensure fake record types are
always correct, to keep implementations honest.
Change-Id: I1d65272e647ffa67018c721d52c639f8ba47d647
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8510
Reviewed-by: Steven Valdez <svaldez@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
This is the only codepath where ssl->version can get a garbage value, which is
a little concerning. Since, in all these cases, the peer is failing to connect
and speaks so low a version we don't even accept it anymore, there is probably
not much value in letting them distinguish protocol_version from a record-layer
version number mismatch, where enforced (which will give a version-related
error anyway).
Should we get a decode_error or so just before version negotiation, we'd have
this behavior already.
Change-Id: I9b3e5685ab9c9ad32a7b7e3129363cd1d4cdaaf4
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8420
Reviewed-by: Steven Valdez <svaldez@google.com>
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>
On Windows, if we write to our socket and then close it, the peer sometimes
doesn't get all the data. This was working for our shimShutsDown tests because
we send close_notify in parallel with the peer and sendAlert(alertCloseNotify)
did not internally return an error.
For convenience, sendAlert returns a local error for non-close_notify alerts.
Suppress that error to avoid the race condition. This makes it behave like the
other shimShutsDown tests.
Change-Id: Iad256e3ea5223285793991e2eba9c7d61f2e3ddf
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/7980
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
The existing logic gets confused in a number of cases around close_notify vs.
fatal alert. SSL_shutdown, while still pushing to the error queue, will fail to
notice alerts. We also get confused if we try to send a fatal alert when we've
already sent something else.
Change-Id: I9b1d217fbf1ee8a9c59efbebba60165b7de9689e
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/7952
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
This is just kind of a silly thing to do. NSS doesn't allow them either. Fatal
alerts would kill the connection regardless and warning alerts are useless. We
previously stopped accepting fragmented alerts but still allowed them doubled
up.
This is in preparation for pulling the shared alert processing code between TLS
and DTLS out of read_bytes into some common place.
Change-Id: Idbef04e39ad135f9601f5686d41f54531981e0cf
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/7451
Reviewed-by: Emily Stark (Dunn) <estark@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>
It's useful to make sure our fuzzer mode works. Not all tests pass, but most
do. (Notably the negative tests for everything we've disabled don't work.) We
can also use then use runner to record fuzzer-mode transcripts with the ciphers
correctly nulled.
Change-Id: Ie41230d654970ce6cf612c0a9d3adf01005522c6
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/7288
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@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>
This option causes clients to ignore HelloRequest messages completely.
This can be suitable in cases where a server tries to perform concurrent
application data and handshake flow, e.g. because they are trying to
“renew” symmetric keys.
Change-Id: I2779f7eff30d82163f2c34a625ec91dc34fab548
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/6431
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Although the DTLS transport layer logic drops failed writes on the floor, it is
actually set up to work correctly. If an SSL_write fails at the transport,
dropping the buffer is fine. Arguably it works better than in TLS because we
don't have the weird "half-committed to data" behavior. Likewise, the handshake
keeps track of how far its gotten and resumes the message at the right point.
This broke when the buffering logic was rewritten because I didn't understand
what the DTLS code was doing. The one thing that doesn't work as one might
expect is non-fatal write errors during rexmit are not recoverable. The next
timeout must fire before we try again.
This code is quite badly sprinkled in here, so add tests to guard it against
future turbulence. Because of the rexmit issues, the tests need some hacks
around calls which may trigger them. It also changes the Go DTLS implementation
from being completely strict about sequence numbers to only requiring they be
monotonic.
The tests also revealed another bug. This one seems to be upstream's fault, not
mine. The logic to reset the handshake hash on the second ClientHello (in the
HelloVerifyRequest case) was a little overenthusiastic and breaks if the
ClientHello took multiple tries to send.
Change-Id: I9b38b93fff7ae62faf8e36c4beaf848850b3f4b9
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/6417
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>
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>
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>
The maximum buffer size computation wasn't quite done right in
ssl_buffer.c, so we were failing with BUFFER_TOO_SMALL for sufficiently
large records. Fix this and, as penance, add 103 tests.
(Test that we can receive maximum-size records in all cipher suites.
Also test SSL_OP_MICROSOFT_BIG_SSLV3_BUFFER while I'm here.)
BUG=526998
Change-Id: I714c16dda2ed13f49d8e6cd1b48adc5a8491f43c
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/5785
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Now that it even works at all (type = 0 bug aside), add tests for it.
Test both close_notify being received before and after SSL_shutdown is
called. In the latter case, have the peer send some junk to be ignored
to test that works.
Also test that SSL_shutdown fails on unclean shutdown and that quiet
shutdowns ignore it.
BUG=526437
Change-Id: Iff13b08feb03e82f21ecab0c66d5f85aec256137
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/5769
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Our tests shouldn't panic if the program misbehaves.
Change-Id: I113e050222bcf48e5f25883f860dbc1c5c77e77e
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/5764
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
The old empty record logic discarded the records at a very low-level.
Let the error bubble up to ssl3_read_bytes so the type mismatch logic
may kick in before the empty record is skipped.
Add tests for when the record in question is application data, before
before the handshake and post ChangeCipherSpec.
BUG=521840
Change-Id: I47dff389cda65d6672b9be39d7d89490331063fa
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/5754
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
The existing tests only went monotonic. Allow an arbitrary mapping
function. Also test by sending more app data. The handshake is fairly
resilient to replayed packets, whereas our test code intentionally
isn't.
Change-Id: I0fb74bbacc260c65ec5f6a1ca8f3cb23b4192855
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/5556
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
We shouldn't have protocol constraints that are sensitive to whether
data is returned synchronously or not.
Per https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/#/c/4112/, the original
limitation was to avoid OpenSSL ABI changes. This is no longer a
concern.
Add tests for the sync and async case. Send the empty records in two
batches to ensure the count is reset correctly.
Change-Id: I3fee839438527e71adb83d437879bb0d49ca5c07
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/5040
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Now that WebRTC honors packet boundaries (https://crbug.com/447431), we
can start enforcing them correctly. Configuring read-ahead now does
nothing. Instead DTLS will always set "read-ahead" and also correctly
enforce packet boundaries when reading records. Add tests to ensure that
badly fragmented packets are ignored. Because such packets don't fail
the handshake, the tests work by injecting an alert in the front of the
handshake stream and ensuring the DTLS implementation ignores them.
ssl3_read_n can be be considerably unraveled now, but leave that for
future cleanup. For now, make it correct.
BUG=468889
Change-Id: I800cfabe06615af31c2ccece436ca52aed9fe899
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/4820
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
This drops in a copy of a subset of golang.org/x/crypto/poly1305 to implement
Poly1305. Hopefully this will keep them from regression as we rework the record
layer.
Change-Id: Ic1e0d941a0a9e5ec260151ced8acdf9215c4b887
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/4257
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Partly inspired by the new state exposed in
dc3da93899, stress this codepath by spamming our
poor shim with warning alerts.
Change-Id: I876c6e52911b6eb57493cf3e1782b37ea96d01f8
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/4112
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
We have test coverage for invalid alerts, but not for normal ones on the DTLS
side.
Change-Id: I359dce8d4dc80dfa99b5d8bacd73f48a8e4ac310
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/3291
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
The check on the DTLS side was broken anyway. On the TLS side, the spec does
say to ignore them, but there should be no need for this in future-proofing and
NSS doesn't appear to be lenient here. See also
https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/#/c/3233/
Change-Id: I0846222936c5e08acdcfd9d6f854a99df767e468
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/3290
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 reverts commit c67a3ae6ba. With a
deterministic clock, we can now go back to being strict about retransmits. Our
tests will now require that the shim only retransmit when we expect it to.
Change-Id: Iab1deb9665dcd294790c8253d920089e83a9140c
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/3211
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
BoringSSL currently retransmits non-deterministically on an internal timer
(rather than one supplied externally), so the tests currently fail flakily
depending on timing. Valgrind is a common source for this. We still assume an
in-order and reliable channel, but drop retransmits silently:
- Handshake messages may arrive with old sequence numbers.
- Retransmitted CCS records arrive from the previous epoch.
- We may receive a retransmitted Finished after we believe the handshake has
completed. (Aside: even in a real implementation, only Finished is possible
here. Even with out-of-order delivery, retransmitted or reordered messages
earlier in the handshake come in under a different epoch.)
Note that because DTLS renego and a Finished retransmit are ambiguous at the
record layer[*], this precludes us writing tests for DTLS renego. But DTLS
renego should get removed anyway. As BoringSSL currently implements renego,
this ambiguity is also a source of complexity in the real implementation. (See
the SSL3_MT_FINISHED check in dtls1_read_bytes.)
[*] As a further fun aside, it's also complex if dispatching renego vs Finished
after handshake message reassembly. The spec doesn't directly say the sequence
number is reset across renegos, but it says "The first message each side
transmits in /each/ handshake always has message_seq = 0". This means that such
an implementation needs the handshake message reassembly logic be aware that a
Finished fragment with high sequence number is NOT an out-of-order fragment for
the next handshake.
Change-Id: I35d13560f82bcb5eeda62f4de1571d28c818cc36
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/2770
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
The record-layer version of the ServerHello should match the final version. The
record-layer version of the ClientHello should be the advertised version, but
clamped at TLS 1.0. This is to ensure future rewrites do not regress this.
Change-Id: I96f1f0674944997ff38b562453a322ce61652635
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/2540
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>
Prior to this change, BoringSSL maintained a 2-byte buffer for alerts,
and would support reassembly of fragmented alerts.
NSS does not support fragmented alerts, nor would any reasonable
implementation produce them. Remove fragmented alert handling and
produce an error if a fragmented alert has ever been encountered.
Change-Id: I31530ac372e8a90b47cf89404630c1c207cfb048
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/2125
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
At the record layer, DTLS maintains a window of seen sequence numbers to detect
replays. Add tests to cover that case. Test both repeated sequence numbers
within the window and sequence numbers past the window's left edge. Also test
receiving sequence numbers far past the window's right edge.
Change-Id: If6a7a24869db37fdd8fb3c4b3521b730e31f8f86
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/2221
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>
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>
Also change MaxHandshakeRecordLength to 1 in the handshake coverage tests to
better stress the state machine.
Change-Id: I27fce2c000b3d4818fd2e9a47fb09d3f646dd1bd
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/1452
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Add a framework for testing the asynchronous codepath. Move some handshake
state machine coverage tests to cover a range of record-layer and
handshake-layer asynchronicity.
This adds tests for the previous two async bugs fixed.
Change-Id: I422ef33ba3eeb0ad04766871ed8bc59b677b169e
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/1410
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
