SSL 3.0 used to have a nice and simple rule around extensions. They don't
exist. And then RFC 5746 came along and made this all extremely confusing.
In an SSL 3.0 server, rather than blocking ServerHello extension
emission when renegotiation_info is missing, ignore all ClientHello
extensions but renegotiation_info. This avoids a mismatch between local
state and the extensions with emit.
Notably if, for some reason, a ClientHello includes the session_ticket
extension, does NOT include renegotiation_info or the SCSV, and yet the
client or server are decrepit enough to negotiate SSL 3.0, the
connection will fail due to unexpected NewSessionTicket message.
See https://crbug.com/425979#c9 for a discussion of something similar
that came up in diagnosing https://poodle.io/'s buggy POODLE check.
This is analogous to upstream's
5a3d8eebb7667b32af0ccc3f12f314df6809d32d.
(Not supporting renego as a server in any form anyway, we may as well
completely ignore extensions, but then our extensions callbacks can't
assume the parse hooks are always called. This way the various NULL
handlers still function.)
Change-Id: Ie689a0e9ffb0369ef7a20ab4231005e87f32d5f8
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/6180
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Some code relies on OpenSSL's behavior where it allowed for NULL. But this time
add a comment so people don't think this is the convention for new functions.
BUG=538292
Change-Id: I66566e0e24566fafe17e05369276248be3b05591
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/6070
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
ssl.h should be first. Also two lines after includes and the rest of the
file.
Change-Id: Icb7586e00a3e64170082c96cf3f8bfbb2b7e1611
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/5892
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Also switch to the new variable names (SSL_CTX *ctx, SSL *ssl,
SSL_SESSION *session) for all documented functions.
Change-Id: I15e15a703b96af1727601108223c7ce3b0691f1d
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/5882
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
