Rather than rely on Chromium to query SSL_initial_handshake_complete in the
callback (which didn't work anyway because the callback is called afterwards),
move the logic into BoringSSL. BoringSSL already enforces that clients never
offer resumptions on renegotiation (it wouldn't work well anyway as client
session cache lookup is external), so it's reasonable to also implement
in-library that sessions established on a renegotiation are not cached.
Add a bunch of tests that new_session_cb is called when expected.
BUG=501418
Change-Id: I42d44c82b043af72b60a0f8fdb57799e20f13ed5
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/5171
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
b4d65fda70 was written concurrently with
my updating runner to handle -resource-dir (in
7c803a65d5) and thus it didn't include the
needed change for the test that it added to handle it.
This change fixes that added test so that it can run with -resource-dir.
Change-Id: I06b0adfb3fcf3f11c061fe1c8332a45cd7cd2dbc
This adds a new API, SSL_set_private_key_method, which allows the consumer to
customize private key operations. For simplicity, it is incompatible with the
multiple slots feature (which will hopefully go away) but does not, for now,
break it.
The new method is only routed up for the client for now. The server will
require a decrypt hook as well for the plain RSA key exchange.
BUG=347404
Change-Id: I35d69095c29134c34c2af88c613ad557d6957614
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/5049
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Turns out the safer/simpler method still wasn't quite right. :-)
session->sess_cert isn't serialized and deserialized, which is poor. Duplicate
it manually for now. Leave a TODO to get rid of that field altogether as it's
not especially helpful. The certificate-related fields should be in the
session. The others probably have no reason to be preserved on resumptions at
all.
Test by making bssl_shim.cc assert the peer cert chain is there or not as
expected.
BUG=501220
Change-Id: I44034167629720d6e2b7b0b938d58bcab3ab0abe
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/5170
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
To account for the changes in ticket renewal, Chromium will need to listen for
new_session_cb to determine whether the handshake produced a new session.
Chromium currently never caches sessions produced on a renegotiation. To retain
that behavior, it'll need to know whether new_session_cb is initial or not.
Rather than maintain duplicate state and listen for SSL_HANDSHAKE_DONE, it's
simpler to just let it query ssl->s3->initial_handshake_complete.
BUG=501418
Change-Id: Ib2f2541460bd09cf16106388e9cfdf3662e02681
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/5126
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
If gdb is attached, it's convenient to be able to continue running.
Change-Id: I3bbb2634d05a08f6bad5425f71da2210dbb80cfe
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/5125
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
This change adds flags to runner to allow it to be sufficiently
configured that it can run from any directory.
Change-Id: I82c08da4ffd26c5b11637480b0a79eaba0904d38
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/5130
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
See also upstream's 9dcab127e1. The root problem
is dtls1_read_bytes is wrong, but we can get the right behavior now and add a
regression test for it before cleaning it up.
Change-Id: I4e5c39ab254a872d9f64242c9b77b020bdded6e6
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/5123
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
See also upstream's 27c76b9b8010b536687318739c6f631ce4194688, CVE-2015-1791.
Rather than write a dup function, serializing and deserializing the object is
simpler. It also fixes a bug in the original fix where it never calls
new_session_cb to store the new session (for clients which use that callback;
how clients should handle the session cache is much less clear).
The old session isn't pruned as we haven't processed the Finished message yet.
RFC 5077 says:
The server MUST NOT assume that the client actually received the updated
ticket until it successfully verifies the client's Finished message.
Moreover, because network messages are asynchronous, a new SSL connection may
have began just before the client received the new ticket, so any such servers
are broken regardless.
Change-Id: I13b3dc986dc58ea2ce66659dbb29e14cd02a641b
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/5122
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Mirrors SSL_SESSION_to_bytes. It avoids having to deal with object-reuse, the
non-size_t length parameter, and trailing data. Both it and the object-reuse
variant back onto an unexposed SSL_SESSION_parse which reads a CBS.
Note that this changes the object reuse story slightly. It's now merely an
optional output pointer that frees its old contents. No d2i_SSL_SESSION
consumer in Google that's built does reuse, much less reuse with the assumption
that the top-level object won't be overridden.
Change-Id: I5cb8522f96909bb222cab0f342423f2dd7814282
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/5121
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
If we're going to have PSK and use standard cipher suites, this might be
the best that we can do for the moment.
Change-Id: I35d9831b2991dc5b23c9e24d98cdc0db95919d39
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/5052
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
This is the best PSK cipher suite, but it's non-standard and nobody is
using it. Trivial to bring back in the future if we have need of it.
Change-Id: Ie78790f102027c67d1c9b19994bfb10a2095ba92
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/5051
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
This is a remnant of DSA support. It's not possible to parse out an incomplete
public key for the more reasonable X.509 key types.
Change-Id: I4f4c7b9d3795f5f0635f80a4cec9ca4c778e6c69
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/5050
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Most of the logic was redundant with checks already made in
ssl3_get_server_certificate. The DHE check was missing an ECDHE half
(and was impossible). The ECDSA check allowed an ECDSA certificate for
RSA. The only non-redundant check was a key usage check which,
strangely, is only done for ECDSA ciphers.
(Although this function called X509_certificate_type and checked sign
bits, those bits in X509_certificate_type are purely a function of the
key type and don't do anything.)
Change-Id: I8df7eccc0ffff49e4cfd778bd91058eb253b13cb
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/5047
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
The NULL checks later on notice, but failing with
SSL_R_UNABLE_TO_FIND_PUBLIC_KEY_PARAMETERS on accident is confusing.
Require that the message be non-empty.
Change-Id: Iddfac6a3ae6e6dc66c3de41d3bb26e133c0c6e1d
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/5046
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
The current logic requires each key exchange extract the key. It also
leaves handling X509_get_pubkey failure to the anonymous cipher suite
case which has an escape hatch where it goes back to check
ssl3_check_cert_and_algorithm.
Instead, get the key iff we know we have a signature to check.
Change-Id: If7154c7156aad3b89489defe4c1d951eeebf0089
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/5045
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
This doesn't even change behavior. Unlike local configuration, the peer
can never have multiple certificates anyway. (Even with a renego, the
SESS_CERT is created anew.)
This does lose the implicit certificate type check, but the certificate
type is already checked in ssl3_get_server_certificate and later checked
post-facto in ssl3_check_cert_and_algorithm (except that one seems to
have some bugs like it accepts ECDSA certificates for RSA cipher suites,
to be cleaned up in a follow-up). Either way, we have the certificate
mismatch tests for this.
BUG=486295
Change-Id: I437bb723bb310ad54ee4150eda67c1cfe43377b3
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/5044
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>
Change-Id: I55dc3d87a9571901abd2bbaf268871a482cf3bc5
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/4983
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
The client and server both have to decide on behaviour when resuming a
session where the EMS state of the session doesn't match the EMS state
as exchanged in the handshake.
Original handshake
| No Yes
------+--------------------------------------------------------------
|
R | Server: ok [1] Server: abort [3]
e No | Client: ok [2] Client: abort [4]
s |
u |
m |
e |
Yes | Server: don't resume No problem
| Client: abort; server
| shouldn't have resumed
[1] Servers want to accept legacy clients. The draft[5] says that
resumptions SHOULD be rejected so that Triple-Handshake can't be done,
but we'll rather enforce that EMS was used when using tls-unique etc.
[2] The draft[5] says that even the initial handshake should be aborted
if the server doesn't support EMS, but we need to be able to talk to the
world.
[3] This is a very weird case where a client has regressed without
flushing the session cache. Hopefully we can be strict and reject these.
[4] This can happen when a server-farm shares a session cache but
frontends are not all updated at once. If Chrome is strict here then
hopefully we can prevent any servers from existing that will try to
resume an EMS session that they don't understand. OpenSSL appears to be
ok here: https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tls/current/msg16570.html
[5] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-tls-session-hash-05#section-5.2
BUG=492200
Change-Id: Ie1225a3960d49117b05eefa5a36263d8e556e467
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/4981
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Add expectResumeRejected to note cases where we expect a resumption
handshake to be rejected. (This was previously done by adding a flag,
which is a little less clear.)
Also, save the result of crypto/tls.Conn.ConnectionState() rather than
repeat that a lot.
Change-Id: I963945eda5ce1f3040b655e2441174b918b216b3
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/4980
Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
With SSL2 gone, there's no need for this split between the abstract
cipher framework and ciphers. Put the cipher suite table in ssl_cipher.c
and move other SSL_CIPHER logic there. With that gone, prune the
cipher-related hooks in SSL_PROTOCOL_METHOD.
BUG=468889
Change-Id: I48579de8bc4c0ea52781ba1b7b57bc5b4919d21c
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/4961
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Make sure we don't break that on accident.
Change-Id: I22d58d35170d43375622fe61e4a588d1d626a054
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/4960
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
They're redundant with each other.
Change-Id: I17e7ff8c4e0b1486986dd866fd99673fa2aaa494
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/4959
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
All ciphers are implemented by an EVP_AEAD.
Change-Id: Ifa754599a34e16bf97e1a4b84a271c6d45462c7c
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/4958
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
The ctrl hooks are left alone since they should just go away.
Simplifying the cipher story will happen in the next CL.
BUG=468889
Change-Id: I979971c90f59c55cd5d17554f1253158b114f18b
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/4957
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
This still needs significant work, especially the close_notify half, but
clarify the interface and get *_read_bytes out of SSL_PROTOCOL_METHOD.
read_bytes is an implementation detail of those two and get_message
rather than both an implementation detail of get_message for handshake
and a (wholly inappropriate) exposed interface for the other two.
BUG=468889
Change-Id: I7dd23869e0b7c3532ceb2e9dd31ca25ea31128e7
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/4956
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
The SSL_PROTOCOL_METHOD table needs work, but this makes it clearer
exactly what the shared interface between the upper later and TLS/DTLS
is.
BUG=468889
Change-Id: I38931c484aa4ab3f77964d708d38bfd349fac293
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/4955
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
The old upstream logic actually didn't do this, but 1.1.0's new code does.
Given that the version has never changed and even unknown fields were rejected
by the old code, this seems a safe and prudent thing to do.
Change-Id: I09071585e5183993b358c10ad36fc206f8bceeda
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/4942
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
The original OpenSSL implementation did the same. M_ASN1_D2I_Finish checks
this. Forwards compatibility with future sessions with unknown fields is
probably not desirable.
Change-Id: I116a8c482cbcc47c3fcc31515c4a3718f66cf268
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/4941
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
9a41d1b946 broke handling of multiple records in
a single packet. If |extend| is true, not all of the previous packet should be
consumed, only up to the record length.
Add a test which stresses the DTLS stack's handling of multiple handshake
fragments in a handshake record and multiple handshake records in a packet.
Change-Id: I96571098ad9001e96440501c4730325227b155b8
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/4950
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
See also upstream's dab18ab596. This allows us to
add an assertion to the finished computation that the handshake buffer has
already been released.
BUG=492371
Change-Id: I8f15c618c8b2c70bfe583c81644d9dbea95519d4
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/4887
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
This allows us to merge two of the ssl3_digest_cached_records calls which were
almost, but not completely, redundant. Also catches a missing case: the buffer
may be discarded if doing session resumption but otherwise enabling client
authentication.
BUG=492371
Change-Id: I78e9a4a9cca665e89899ef97b815454c6f5c7e02
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/4885
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Servers can no longer renegotiate.
Change-Id: Id79d5753562e29d2872871f4f571552a019215fa
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/4884
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
This is documented as "Only request a client certificate on the initial TLS/SSL
handshake. Do not ask for a client certificate again in case of a
renegotiation." Server-side renegotiation is gone.
I'm not sure this flag has ever worked anyway, dating all the way back to
SSLeay 0.8.1b. ssl_get_new_session overwrites s->session, so the old
session->peer is lost.
Change-Id: Ie173243e189c63272c368a55167b8596494fd59c
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/4883
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Never send the time as a client. Always send it as a server.
Change-Id: I20c55078cfe199d53dc002f6ee5dd57060b086d5
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/4829
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Yes, OpenSSL lets you randomly change its internal state. This is used
as part of server-side renegotiation. Server-side renegotiation is gone.
BUG=429450
Change-Id: Ic1b013705734357acf64e8bf89a051b2b7521c64
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/4828
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
They were added to avoid accidentally enabling renego for a consumer which set
them to zero to break the handshake on renego. Now that renego is off by
default, we can get rid of them again.
Change-Id: I2cc3bf567c55c6562352446a36f2b5af37f519ba
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/4827
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
It's never called and the state is meaningless now.
Change-Id: I5429ec3eb7dc2b789c0584ea88323f0ff18920ae
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/4826
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
When the peer or caller requests a renegotiation, OpenSSL doesn't
renegotiate immediately. It sets a flag to begin a renegotiation as soon
as record-layer read and write buffers are clear. One reason is that
OpenSSL's record layer cannot write a handshake record while an
application data record is being written. The buffer consistency checks
around partial writes will break.
None of these cases are relevant for the client auth hack. We already
require that renego come in at a quiescent part of the application
protocol by forbidding handshake/app_data interleave.
The new behavior is now: when a HelloRequest comes in, if the record
layer is not idle, the renegotiation is rejected as if
SSL_set_reject_peer_renegotiations were set. Otherwise we immediately
begin the new handshake. The server may not send any application data
between HelloRequest and completing the handshake. The HelloRequest may
not be consumed if an SSL_write is pending.
Note this does require that Chromium's HTTP stack not attempt to read
the HTTP response until the request has been written, but the
renegotiation logic already assumes it. Were Chromium to drive the
SSL_read state machine early and the server, say, sent a HelloRequest
after reading the request headers but before we've sent the whole POST
body, the SSL state machine may racily enter renegotiate early, block
writing the POST body on the new handshake, which would break Chromium's
ERR_SSL_CLIENT_AUTH_CERT_NEEDED plumbing.
BUG=429450
Change-Id: I6278240c3bceb5d2e1a2195bdb62dd9e0f4df718
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/4825
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
The only case where renego is supported is if we are a client and the
server sends a HelloRequest. That is still needed to support the renego
+ client auth hack in Chrome. Beyond that, no other forms of renego will
work.
The messy logic where the handshake loop is repurposed to send
HelloRequest and the extremely confusing tri-state s->renegotiate (which
makes SSL_renegotiate_pending a lie during the initial handshake as a
server) are now gone. The next change will further simplify things by
removing ssl->s3->renegotiate and the renego deferral logic. There's
also some server-only renegotiation checks that can go now.
Also clean up ssl3_read_bytes' HelloRequest handling. The old logic relied on
the handshake state machine to reject bad HelloRequests which... actually that
code probably lets you initiate renego by sending the first four bytes of a
ServerHello and expecting the peer to read it later.
BUG=429450
Change-Id: Ie0f87d0c2b94e13811fe8e22e810ab2ffc8efa6c
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/4824
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
This dates back to upstream's a2a0158959.
It seems to be a remnant of those SSL_clear calls in the handshake state
machine which... were also bizarre and since gone.
Since SSL_clear is to drop the current connection but retain the
configuration, it doesn't really make sense to forbid it while you're
mid-handshake.
This removes another consumer of s->renegotiate.
BUG=429450
Change-Id: Ifac6bf11644447fd5571262bed7421684739bc39
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/4823
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
ssl_cipher_list_to_bytes is client-only, so s->renegotiate worked, but
the only reason the other two worked is because s->renegotiate isn't a
lie on the server before ServerHello.
BUG=429450
Change-Id: If68a986c6ec4a0f16e57a6187238e05b50ecedfc
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/4822
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>
Adam Langley
David Benjamin
Adam Langley