Apparently we never wrote one of those. Also send a decrypt_error alert
to be consistent with all the other signature checks.
Change-Id: Ib5624d098d1e3086245192cdce92f5df26005064
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/11180
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
The old numbers violate a MUST-level requirement in TLS 1.2 to not
advertise anonymous (0x0700 ends in 0x00). The spec has been updated
with new allocations which avoid these.
BUG=webrtc:6342
Change-Id: Ia5663ada98fa1ebf0f8a7f50fe74a0e9206c4194
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/11131
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Found by libFuzzer and then one more mistake caught by valgrind. Add a
test for this case.
Change-Id: I92773bc1231bafe5fc069e8568d93ac0df4c8acb
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/11129
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Plain PSK omits the ServerKeyExchange when there is no hint and includes
it otherwise (it should have always sent it), while other PSK ciphers
like ECDHE_PSK cannot omit the hint. Having different capabilities here
is odd and RFC 4279 5.2 suggests that all PSK ciphers are capable of
"[not] provid[ing] an identity hint".
Interpret this to mean no identity hint and empty identity hint are the
same state. Annoyingly, this gives a plain PSK implementation two
options for spelling an empty hint. The spec isn't clear and this is not
really a battle worth fighting, so I've left both acceptable and added a
test for this case.
See also https://android-review.googlesource.com/c/275217/. This is also
consistent with Android's PskKeyManager API, our only consumer anyway.
https://developer.android.com/reference/android/net/PskKeyManager.html
Change-Id: I8a8e6cc1f7dd1b8b202cdaf3d4f151bebfb4a25b
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/11087
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Commit-Queue: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
CQ-Verified: CQ bot account: commit-bot@chromium.org <commit-bot@chromium.org>
It's easy to forget to check those. Unfortunately, it's also easy to
forget to check inner structures, which is going to be harder to stress,
but do these to start with. In doing, so fix up and unify some
error-handling, and add a missing check when parsing TLS 1.2
CertificateRequest.
This was also inspired by the recent IETF posting.
Change-Id: I27fe3cd3506258389a75d486036388400f0a33ba
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/10963
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 that this matters in the slightest, but the recent IETF mailing
reminded me we don't test this.
Change-Id: I300c96d6a63733d538a7019a7cb74d4e65d0498f
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/10961
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>
Although RFC 6066 recommends against it, some servers send a warning
alert prior to ServerHello on SNI mismatch, and, per spec, TLS 1.2
allows it.
We're fine here, but add a test for it. It interacts interestingly with
TLS 1.3 forbidding warning alerts because it happens before version
negotiation.
Change-Id: I0032313c986c835b6ae1aa43da6ee0dad17a97c2
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/10800
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>
Changing parameters on renegotiation makes all our APIs confusing. This
one has no reason to change, so lock it down. In particular, our
preference to forbid Token Binding + renego may be overridden at the
IETF, even though it's insane. Loosening it will be a bit less of a
headache if EMS can't change.
https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/unbearable/current/msg00690.html
claims that this is already in the specification and enforced by NSS. I
can't find anything to this effect in the specification. It just says
the client MUST disable renegotiation when EMS is missing, which is
wishful thinking. At a glance, NSS doesn't seem to check, though I could
be misunderstanding the code.
Nonetheless, locking this down is a good idea anyway. Accurate or not,
take the email as an implicit endorsement of this from Mozilla.
Change-Id: I236b05991d28bed199763dcf2f47bbfb9d0322d7
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/10721
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Commit-Queue: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
CQ-Verified: CQ bot account: commit-bot@chromium.org <commit-bot@chromium.org>
One less thing to keep track of.
https://github.com/tlswg/tls13-spec/pull/549 got merged.
Change-Id: Ide66e547140f8122a3b8013281be5215c11b6de0
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/10482
Reviewed-by: Steven Valdez <svaldez@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Commit-Queue: 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>
The TLS 1.3 state machine is actually less in need of the aggressive
state machine coverage tests, but nonetheless, we should cover all
handshake shapes. PSK resumption and HelloRetryRequest were missing.
We were also accidentally running "DTLS" versions of the TLS 1.3 tests
but silently running TLS 1.2.
Change-Id: I65db4052b89d770db7e47738e73aaadde9634236
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/10441
Reviewed-by: Nick Harper <nharper@chromium.org>
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>
Some version mismatch cases were not being covered due to TLS 1.2 and
TLS 1.3 having very different spellings for tickets resumption. Also
explicitly test that TLS 1.2 tickets aren't offered in the TLS 1.3 slot
and vice versa.
Change-Id: Ibe58386ea2004fb3c1af19342b8d808f13f737a9
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/10183
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 should not be allowed select a protocol that wasn't
advertised. Callers tend to not really notice and act as if some default
were chosen which is unlikely to work very well.
Change-Id: Ib6388db72f05386f854d275bab762ca79e8174e6
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/10284
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Commit-Queue: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
CQ-Verified: CQ bot account: commit-bot@chromium.org <commit-bot@chromium.org>
We handle this correctly but never wrote a test for it. Noticed this in
chatting about the second ClientHello.version bug workaround with Eric
Rescorla.
Change-Id: I09bc6c995d07c0f2c9936031b52c3c639ed3695e
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/9154
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: I998f69269cdf813da19ccccc208b476f3501c8c4
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8991
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>
We were sending decode_error, but the spec explicitly says (RFC 5246):
unsupported_extension
sent by clients that receive an extended server hello containing
an extension that they did not put in the corresponding client
hello. This message is always fatal.
Also add a test for this when it's a known but unoffered extension. We
actually end up putting these in different codepaths now due to the
custom extensions stuff.
Thanks to Eric Rescorla for pointing this out.
Change-Id: If6c8033d4cfe69ef8af5678b873b25e0dbadfc4f
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/9061
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>
BUG=74
Change-Id: I72d52c1fbc3413e940dddbc0b20c7f22459da693
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8981
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 in preparation for switching finish_handshake to a
release_current_message hook. finish_handshake in DTLS is also
responsible for releasing any memory associated with extra messages in
the handshake.
Except that's not right and we need to make it an error anyway. Given
that the rest of the DTLS dispatch layer already strongly assumes there
is only one message in epoch one, putting the check in the fragment
processing works fine enough. Add tests for this.
This will certainly need revising when DTLS 1.3 happens (perhaps just a
version check, perhaps bringing finish_handshake back as a function that
can fail... which means we need a state just before SSL_ST_OK), but DTLS
1.3 post-handshake messages haven't really been written down, so let's
do the easy thing for now and add a test for when it gets more
interesting.
This removes the sequence number reset in the DTLS code. That reset
never did anything becase we don't and never will renego. We should make
sure DTLS 1.3 does not bring the reset back for post-handshake stuff.
(It was wrong in 1.2 too. Penultimate-flight retransmits and renego
requests are ambiguous in DTLS.)
BUG=83
Change-Id: I33d645a8550f73e74606030b9815fdac0c9fb682
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8988
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Implemented in preparation for testing the C implementation. Tested
against itself.
BUG=74
Change-Id: Iec1b9ad22e09711fa4e67c97cc3eb257585c3ae5
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8873
Reviewed-by: Nick Harper <nharper@chromium.org>
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>
Also parse out the ticket lifetime which was previously ignored.
BUG=75
Change-Id: I6ba92017bd4f1b31da55fd85d2af529fd592de11
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8871
Reviewed-by: Nick Harper <nharper@chromium.org>
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>
Ridiculous as it is, the protocol does not forbid packing HelloRequest
and Finished into the same record. Add a test for this case.
Change-Id: I8e1455b261f56169309070bf44d14d40a63eae50
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8901
Reviewed-by: Steven Valdez <svaldez@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
[Tests added by davidben.]
Change-Id: I0d54a4f8b8fe91b348ff22658d95340cdb48b089
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8850
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: I92425d7c72111623ddfbe8391f2d2fa88f101ef3
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8818
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: Ibde837040d2332bc8570589ba5be9b32e774bfcf
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8811
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>
There is no longer need for the Go code to implement 'fake TLS 1.3'. We
now implement real incomplete TLS 1.3.
Change-Id: I8577100ef8c7c83ca540f37dadd451263f9f37e6
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8823
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 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>
TLS 1.3 will go through very different code than everything else. Even
SSL 3.0 is somewhat special-cased now. Move the invalid signature tests
there and run at all versions.
Change-Id: Idd0ee9aac2939c0c8fd9af2ea7b4a22942121c60
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8775
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>
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>
(Of course, it's still signing ServerKeyExchange messages since the
handshake's the old one.)
Change-Id: I35844a329d983f61ed0b5be20b333487406fe7e4
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8614
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>
[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>
[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 1.3 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>
In preparation for TLS 1.3 using its actual handshake, switch most tests
to TLS 1.3 and add liberal TODOs for the tests which will need TLS 1.3
variants.
In doing so, move a few tests from basic tests into one of the groups.
Also rename BadECDSACurve to BadECDHECurve (it was never ECDSA) and add
a test to make sure FALLBACK_SCSV is correctly sensitive to the maximum
version.
Change-Id: Ifca6cf8f7a48d6f069483c0aab192ae691b1dd8e
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8560
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>
We were missing this case. It is possible to receive an early unencrypted
ChangeCipherSpec alert in DTLS because they aren't ordered relative to the
handshake. Test this case. (ChangeCipherSpec in DTLS is kind of pointless.)
Change-Id: I84268bc1821734f606fb20bfbeda91abf372f32c
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8460
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@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>
By corrupting the X25519 and Newhope parts separately, the test shows
that both are in use. Possibly excessive?
Change-Id: Ieb10f46f8ba876faacdafe70c5561c50a5863153
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8250
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
This is easier to deploy, and more obvious. This commit reverts a few
pieces of e25775bc, but keeps most of it.
Change-Id: If8d657a4221c665349c06041bb12fffca1527a2c
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/8061
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
CECPQ1 is a new key exchange that concatenates the results of an X25519
key agreement and a NEWHOPE key agreement.
Change-Id: Ib919bdc2e1f30f28bf80c4c18f6558017ea386bb
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/7962
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
