Record splitting is a send-side only behaviour and supporting it in
fuzzer mode was messy.
Change-Id: I406d2cc77f1d83ed2039a85b95acdfbc815f5a44
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/17944
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Clang for Windows does not like OPENSSL_COMPILE_ASSERT inside a function
in C++. It complains that the struct is unused. I think we worked around
this in C previously by making it expand to C11 _Static_assert when
available.
But libssl is now C++ and assumes a C++11-capable compiler. Use real
static_assert.
Bug: 132
Change-Id: I6aceb95360244bd2c80d194b80676483abb60519
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/17924
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
This plumbs EVP_AEAD_CTX_seal_scatter all the way through to
tls_record.c, so we can add a new zero-copy record sealing method on top
of the existing code.
Change-Id: I01fdd88abef5442dc16605ea31b29b4b1231c073
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/17684
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Due to SSL 3.0 legacy, TLS 1.0 through 1.2 allow ClientHello and
ServerHello messages to omit the extensions field altogether, rather
than write an empty field. We broke this in
https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/17704/ when we needed to a
second ServerHello parsing path.
Fix this and add some regression tests to explicitly test both the
omitted and empty extensions ClientHello and ServerHello cases.
Bug: chromium:743218
Change-Id: I8297ba608570238e19f12ea44a9fe2fe9d881d28
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/17904
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
This change updates the ChaCha20-Poly1305 AEAD to be able to process
|extra_in| data. It does this by encrypting the extra data byte-by-byte
(because extra data should be very small). Both the generic and assembly
code is updated to be able to include this extra ciphertext in the
Poly1305 calculation.
Change-Id: I751ed31fb7e1f4db6974e9ed31721a43177cf8cb
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/17465
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Commit-Queue: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
This is in an attempt to debug the Mac flakiness. The timestamps will
hopefully help narrow down the order of operations here.
Bug: 199
Change-Id: I8b8dd7222e3a57a8b055b8bc1b7731334e0fcdf0
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/17886
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Commit-Queue: Steven Valdez <svaldez@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Steven Valdez <svaldez@google.com>
CQ-Verified: CQ bot account: commit-bot@chromium.org <commit-bot@chromium.org>
This was broken when we added the API to SSL.
Change-Id: I92d4330b0d70f655c9a9ad33898d6b84704e915c
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/17884
Reviewed-by: Steven Valdez <svaldez@google.com>
Commit-Queue: Steven Valdez <svaldez@google.com>
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
There's not much point in enforcing this on these files, and clang
complains about LLVMFuzzerTestOneInput.
Change-Id: Ieae3287d7f7cd9736efd2b9fc11d0e6d89fcfa43
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/17806
Reviewed-by: Steven Valdez <svaldez@google.com>
Commit-Queue: Steven Valdez <svaldez@google.com>
This implements PR #1051
(https://github.com/tlswg/tls13-spec/pull/1051).
Local experiments were not able to replicate the claims in the PR, but
implement this anyway for comparison purposes.
Change-Id: Ic9baf5e671f9a44565020466a553dd08f5ec0f1b
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/17844
Reviewed-by: Steven Valdez <svaldez@google.com>
Commit-Queue: Steven Valdez <svaldez@google.com>
CQ-Verified: CQ bot account: commit-bot@chromium.org <commit-bot@chromium.org>
Change-Id: Iefe4790094e2b2c6f9ef0833c00ab37707b7b19a
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/17805
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Commit-Queue: Steven Valdez <svaldez@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Steven Valdez <svaldez@google.com>
I suspect this won't actually tell us much useful w.r.t. the Mac test
flakes, but we may as well print what we can get.
Change-Id: I4931f6000648c4bd955a132b54351ff83d6b6273
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/17804
Commit-Queue: Steven Valdez <svaldez@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Steven Valdez <svaldez@google.com>
CQ-Verified: CQ bot account: commit-bot@chromium.org <commit-bot@chromium.org>
And, with that, stage one is complete. ssl/internal.h may include C++.
Bug: 132
Change-Id: I0cb89f0ed5f4be36632a50744a80321595dc921c
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/17768
Reviewed-by: Steven Valdez <svaldez@google.com>
This leaves just the TLS 1.3 handshake code.
Bug: 132
Change-Id: I2bd87b0ecd0ae7d6ea1302bc62c67aec5ca1dccb
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/17767
Reviewed-by: Steven Valdez <svaldez@google.com>
Bug: 132
Change-Id: I2b0c87262a5a529ea264ea8ce2d11c2dba0ec1c8
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/17766
Reviewed-by: Steven Valdez <svaldez@google.com>
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
In the process, merge the old canary function back in.
Bug: 132
Change-Id: Ib455320ecea67c839d0b4ac3882669d24f832b74
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/17765
Reviewed-by: Steven Valdez <svaldez@google.com>
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Bug: 132
Change-Id: I0b83bb05082aa6dad8c15f906cebc2d4f2d5216b
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/17764
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Commit-Queue: Steven Valdez <svaldez@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Steven Valdez <svaldez@google.com>
The EC_POINT munging is sufficiently heavy on the goto err that I went
ahead and tidied it up.
Bug: 132
Change-Id: I7a3b3b3f166e39e4559acec834dd8e1ea9ac8620
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/17747
Reviewed-by: Steven Valdez <svaldez@google.com>
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
CQ-Verified: CQ bot account: commit-bot@chromium.org <commit-bot@chromium.org>
ssl_cipher required fixing the types of the cipher masks.
Bug: 132
Change-Id: I0428d853b25fe4674ac3cad87a8eb92c6c8659e3
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/17746
Reviewed-by: Steven Valdez <svaldez@google.com>
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
CQ-Verified: CQ bot account: commit-bot@chromium.org <commit-bot@chromium.org>
Bug: 132
Change-Id: Ic68252de7b3a8f90d60f052a3cb707730d5a2b16
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/17744
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
http://i1.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/242/631/382.gif
In the first step, switch C files to C++ individually, keeping
everything in internal.h C-compatible. We'll make minimal changes needed
to get things compiling (notably a lot of goto errs will need to turn to
bssl::UniquePtr right away), but more aggressive changes will happen in
later steps.
(To avoid a rebase, I'm intentionally avoiding files that would conflict
with CLs in flight right now.)
Bug: 132
Change-Id: Id4cfd722e7b57d1df11f27236b4658b5d39b5fd2
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/17667
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>
As of 958346a5e7, the callback is called
multiple times.
Change-Id: I40dafeb9f14de7d016644313ef137a0c85f0a24d
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/17725
Commit-Queue: Steven Valdez <svaldez@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Steven Valdez <svaldez@google.com>
Change-Id: I3de3c48a1de59c2b8de348253ce62a648aa6d6eb
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/17724
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: Ie8216ab9de2edf37ae3240a5cb97d974e8252d93
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/17709
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>
Adding it to tlsVersions is sort of pointless when we don't test it.
Change-Id: Ie0c0167cef887aee54e5be90bf7fc98619c1a6fb
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/17708
Commit-Queue: Steven Valdez <svaldez@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Steven Valdez <svaldez@google.com>
CQ-Verified: CQ bot account: commit-bot@chromium.org <commit-bot@chromium.org>
This isn't all of our pointer games by far, but for any code which
doesn't run on armv6, memcpy and pointer cast compile to the same code.
For code with does care about armv6 (do we care?), it'll need a bit more
work. armv6 makes memcpy into a function call.
Ironically, the one platform where C needs its alignment rules is the
one platform that makes it hard to honor C's alignment rules.
Change-Id: Ib9775aa4d9df9381995df8698bd11eb260aac58c
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/17707
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 tag doesn't actually do anything, except cause UBSan to point out
that malloc doesn't align that tightly. malloc does, however, appear to
align up to 16-bytes, which is the actual alignment requirement of that
code. So just replace 64 with 16.
When we're juggling less things, it'd be nice to see what toolchain
support for the various aligned allocators looks like. Or maybe someday
we can use C++ new which one hopes is smart enough to deal with all
this.
Change-Id: Idbdde66852d5dad25a044d4c68ffa3b3f213025a
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/17706
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Commit-Queue: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
CQ-Verified: CQ bot account: commit-bot@chromium.org <commit-bot@chromium.org>
This will require changes in downstream builds, but hopefully very
obvious ones (delete some code).
Bug: 129
Change-Id: Iedbae5d921d0c3979c340ed3106a63b6aa55f3bd
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/17670
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
This is the last of the non-GTest tests. We never did end up writing
example files or doc.go tooling for them. And probably examples should
be in C++ at this point.
Bug: 129
Change-Id: Icbc43c9639cfed7423df20df1cdcb8c35f23fc1a
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/17669
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
CQ-Verified: CQ bot account: commit-bot@chromium.org <commit-bot@chromium.org>
TLS 1.3 deployment is currently blocked by buggy middleboxes
throughout the ecosystem. As an experiment to better understand these bugs
and the problems they are causing, implement TLS 1.3 variants with
alternate encodings. These are still the same protocol, only encoded
slightly differently. We will use what we learn from these experiments to
guide the TLS 1.3 deployment strategy and proposals to the IETF, if any.
These experiments only target the basic 1-RTT TLS 1.3 handshake. Based on
what we learn from this experiment, we may try future variations to
explore 0-RTT and HelloRetryRequest.
When enabled, the server supports all TLS 1.3 variants while the client
is configured to use a particular variant.
Change-Id: I532411d1abc41314dc76acce0246879b754b4c61
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/17327
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 sure why it was expanded out like that.
Change-Id: I6899dbd23130ed7196c45c2784330b2a4fe9bdba
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/17666
Commit-Queue: Steven Valdez <svaldez@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Steven Valdez <svaldez@google.com>
This is a bit verbose, but this API is goofy and causes a lot of
confusion. This may be clearer.
Change-Id: I9affff99b838958058e56ee3062521421c9accc5
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/17645
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Steven Valdez <svaldez@google.com>
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Commit-Queue: Steven Valdez <svaldez@google.com>
For testing purposes.
Change-Id: Ied1b130e805bcf8cc5d1bd30a1ba5049d6f13a6d
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/17665
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Commit-Queue: Steven Valdez <svaldez@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Steven Valdez <svaldez@google.com>
Like other handshake properties, when in 0-RTT on the client,
SSL_version should report the predicted version. This used to work on
accident because of how ssl->version got set in handshake_client.c early
(and that TLS 1.4 does not exist), but we no longer do that.
Change-Id: Ifb63a22b795fe8964ac553844a46040acd5d7323
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/17664
Commit-Queue: Steven Valdez <svaldez@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Steven Valdez <svaldez@google.com>
CQ-Verified: CQ bot account: commit-bot@chromium.org <commit-bot@chromium.org>
We've got three versions of DATA_TOO_LARGE and two versions of
DATA_TOO_SMALL with no apparent distinction between them.
Change-Id: I18ca2cb71ffc31b04c8fd0be316c362da4d7daf9
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/17529
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>
When tree_calculate_user_set() fails, a jump to error failed to
deallocate a possibly allocated |auth_nodes|.
(Imported from upstream's 58314197b54cc1417cfa62d1987462f72a2559e0.)
Also sync up a couple of comments from that revision. Upstream's
reformat script mangled them and we never did the manual fixup.
Change-Id: I1ed896d13ec94d122d71df72af5a3be4eb0eb9d1
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/17644
Commit-Queue: Steven Valdez <svaldez@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Steven Valdez <svaldez@google.com>
CQ-Verified: CQ bot account: commit-bot@chromium.org <commit-bot@chromium.org>
-shim-config, not -shim-path.
Change-Id: I338085b5b5b533f9d511e1b9d82dc44d1161bd26
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/17604
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Commit-Queue: Steven Valdez <svaldez@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Steven Valdez <svaldez@google.com>
CQ-Verified: CQ bot account: commit-bot@chromium.org <commit-bot@chromium.org>
This adds sections on running CAVP tests, breaking FIPS tests and the
RNG design.
Change-Id: I859290e8e2e6ab087aa2b6570a30176b42b01073
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/17585
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Change-Id: I683481b12e66966729297466748f1869de0b913b
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/17584
Commit-Queue: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
CQ-Verified: CQ bot account: commit-bot@chromium.org <commit-bot@chromium.org>
This would be unfamiliar to anyone coming from Chromium.
Change-Id: If9fbdbbadfd874c25dc6ff447ab4af36de0dcd22
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/17544
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
We were missing AES256 and 3DES. Though this test dates to the old
record-splitting code which was much scarier than the new one.
Change-Id: Ia84a8c1a2bbd79fa70941f80cf6393013e4f13d5
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/17543
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
The in_group check is redundant and test an extremely absurd corner of
the syntax.
Change-Id: Ia54bcd7cda7ba05415d3a250ee93e1acedcc43d6
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/17542
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
