If the key is missing, it seems the failure is assumed to be expected.
BUG=473924
Change-Id: I62edd9110fa74bee5e6425fd6786badf5398728c
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/4231
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Move the state to TestState rather than passing pointers to them everywhere.
Also move SSL_read and SSL_write retry loops into helper functions so they
aren't repeated everywhere. This also makes the SSL_write calls all
consistently account for partial writes.
Change-Id: I9bc083a03da6a77ab2fc03c29d4028435fc02620
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/4214
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Extend the False Start tests to optionally send an alert (thus avoiding
deadlock) before waiting for the out-of-order app data. Based on whether the
peer shuts off the connection before or after sending app data, we can
determine whether the peer False Started by observing purely external effects.
Change-Id: I8b9fecc29668e0b0c34b5fd19d0f239545011bae
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/4213
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Based on whether -false-start is passed, we expect SSL_CB_HANDSHAKE_DONE to or
not to fire. Also add a flag that asserts SSL_CB_HANDSHAKE_DONE does *not* fire
in any False Start test where the handshake fails after SSL_connect returns.
Change-Id: I6c5b960fff15e297531e15b16abe0b98be95bec8
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/4212
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
That's a pretty obvious thing to test. I'm not sure how we forgot that one.
Change-Id: I7e1a7df6c6abbdd587e0f7723117f50d09faa5c4
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/4211
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
ASan's own malloc interceptor isn't compatible with this mechanism; it doesn't
see calls to __libc_malloc.
Change-Id: Ibac5aa05c6e40f1c72dcee3a2597e96deffca62c
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/4191
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
This is in preparation for using RAII in the unit tests. Those tests are built
in Chromium as well, but Chromium does not have C++11 library support across
all its toolchains. Compiler support is available, so add a partial
reimplementation of std::unique_ptr and std::move under crypto/test/. The
scopers for the crypto/ library are also moved there while the ones for ssl/
stay in ssl/test/.
Change-Id: I38f769acbc16a870db34649928575c7314b6e9f6
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/4120
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
MinGW on Linux needs lowercase include files. On Windows this doesn't
matter since the filesystems are case-insensitive, but building
BoringSSL on Linux with MinGW has case-sensitive filesystems.
Change-Id: Id9c120d819071b041341fbb978352812d6d073bc
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/4090
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>
Google C++ style allows these. It's also considerably less tedious and
error-prone than defining an out-of-line constructor.
Change-Id: Ib76ccf6079be383722433046ac5c5d796dd1f525
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/4111
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
It was failing only on 32-bit for some reason. Part of TestConfig wasn't
getting initialized.
Change-Id: I2a3747a347a47b47e2357f34d32f8db86d6cc629
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/4110
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
I'm guessing a previous iteration used dlsym to look up the real malloc.
Change-Id: I18be9ef4db4ed059400074c8507d4e2fea882fbc
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/4100
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Both on the client and the server.
Change-Id: I9892c6dbbb29938154aba4f53b10e8b5231f9c47
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/4071
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
This is really just scar tissue with https://crbug.com/468889 being the real
underlying problem. But the test is pretty easy.
Change-Id: I5eca18fdcbde8665c0e6c3ac419a28152647d66f
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/4052
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
In verifying the fix for CVE-2015-0291, I noticed we don't actually have any
test coverage for full handshakes on renegotiation. All our tests always do
resumptions.
Change-Id: Ia9b701e8a50ba9353fefb8cc4fb86e78065d0b40
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/4050
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Noticed these as I was poking around.
Change-Id: I93833a152583feced374c9febf7485bec7abc1c7
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/3973
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
This fixes test flakiness on Windows.
BUG=467767
Change-Id: Ie69b5b43ddd524aadb15c53705f6ec860e928786
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/4001
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
This callback receives information about the ClientHello and can decide
whether or not to allow the handshake to continue.
Change-Id: I21be28335fa74fedb5b73a310ee24310670fc923
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/3721
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
This mostly[*] doesn't matter for TLS since the message would have been
rejected anyway, but, in DTLS, if the peer rejects our Finished, it will send
an encrypted alert. This will then cause it to hang, which isn't very helpful.
I've made the change on both TLS and DTLS so the two protocols don't diverge on
this point. It is true that we're accepting nominally encrypted and
authenticated alerts before Finished, but, prior to ChangeCipherSpec, the
alerts are sent in the clear anyway so an attacker could already inject alerts.
A consumer could only be sensitive to it being post-CCS if it was watching
msg_callback. The only non-debug consumer of msg_callback I've found anywhere
is some hostapd code to detect Heartbeat.
See https://code.google.com/p/webrtc/issues/detail?id=4403 for an instance
where the equivalent behavior in OpenSSL masks an alert.
[*] This does change behavior slightly if the peer sends a warning alert
between CCS and Finished. I believe this is benign as warning alerts are
usually ignored apart from info_callback and msg_callback. The one exception is
a close_notify which is a slightly new state (accepting close_notify during a
handshake seems questionable...), but they're processed pre-CCS too.
Change-Id: Idd0d49b9f9aa9d35374a9f5e2f815cdb931f5254
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/3883
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Notably, drop all special cases around receiving a message in order and
receiving a full message. It makes things more complicated and was the source
of bugs (the MixCompleteMessageWithFragments tests added in this CL did not
pass before). Instead, every message goes through an hm_fragment, and
dtls1_get_message always checks buffered_messages to see if the next is
complete.
The downside is that we pay one more copy of the message data in the common
case. This is only during connection setup, so I think it's worth the
simplicity. (If we want to optimize later, we could either tighten
ssl3_get_message's interface to allow the handshake data being in the
hm_fragment's backing store rather than s->init_buf or swap out s->init_buf
with the hm_fragment's backing store when a mesasge completes.
This CL does not address ssl_read_bytes being an inappropriate API for DTLS.
Future work will revise the handshake/transport boundary to align better with
DTLS's needs. Also other problems that I've left as TODOs.
Change-Id: Ib4570d45634b5181ecf192894d735e8699b1c86b
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/3764
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
We actually don't really care about this special-case since we only test client
full handshakes where the runner sends the second Finished not the shim
(otherwise the overlap logic and retransmitting on every fragment would
probably break us), but it should probably live next to the fragmentation
logic.
Change-Id: I54097d84ad8294bc6c42a84d6f22f496e63eb2a8
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/3763
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
If the peer fragments Finished into multiple pieces, there is no need to
retransmit multiple times.
Change-Id: Ibf708ad079e1633afd420ff1c9be88a80020cba9
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/3762
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
The old test just sent an empty ServerKeyExchange which is sufficient as we
reject the message early. But be more thorough and implement the actual
ephemeral key logic in the test server.
Change-Id: I016658762e4502c928c051e14d69eea67b5a495f
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/3650
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
That might be a reasonable check to make, maybe.
DTLS handshake message reading has a ton of other bugs and needs a complete
rewrite. But let's fix this and get a test in now.
Change-Id: I4981fc302feb9125908bb6161ed1a18288c39e2b
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/3600
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Test both asynchronous and synchronous versions. This callback is somewhat
different from others. It's NOT called a second time when the handshake is
resumed. This appears to be intentional and not a mismerge from the internal
patch. The caller is expected to set up any state before resuming the handshake
state machine.
Also test the early callback returning an error.
Change-Id: If5e6eddd7007ea5cdd7533b4238e456106b95cbd
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/3590
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
This involves more synchronization with child exits as the kernel no longer
closes the pre-created pipes for free, but it works on Windows. As long as
TCP_NODELAY is set, the performance seems comparable. Though it does involve
dealing with graceful socket shutdown. I couldn't get that to work on Windows
without draining the socket; not even SO_LINGER worked. Current (untested)
theory is that Windows refuses to gracefully shutdown a socket if the peer
sends data after we've stopped reading.
cmd.ExtraFiles doesn't work on Windows; it doesn't use fds natively, so you
can't pass fds 4 and 5. (stdin/stdout/stderr are special slots in
CreateProcess.) We can instead use the syscall module directly and mark handles
as inheritable (and then pass the numerical values out-of-band), but that
requires synchronizing all of our shim.Start() calls and assuming no other
thread is spawning a process.
PROC_THREAD_ATTRIBUTE_HANDLE_LIST fixes threading problems, but requires
wrapping more syscalls. exec.Cmd also doesn't let us launch the process
ourselves. Plus it still requires every handle in the list be marked
inheritable, so it doesn't help if some other thread is launching a process
with bInheritHandles TRUE but NOT using PROC_THREAD_ATTRIBUTE_HANDLE_LIST.
(Like Go, though we can take syscall.ForkLock there.)
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/oldnewthing/archive/2011/12/16/10248328.aspx
The more natively Windows option seems to be named pipes, but that too requires
wrapping more system calls. (To be fair, that isn't too painful.) They also
involve a listening server, so we'd still have to synchronize with shim.Wait()
a la net.TCPListener.
Then there's DuplicateHandle, but then we need an out-of-band signal.
All in all, one cross-platform implementation with a TCP sockets seems
simplest.
Change-Id: I38233e309a0fa6814baf61e806732138902347c0
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/3563
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Upstream settled in this API, and it's also the one that we expect
internally and that third_party code will expect.
Change-Id: Id7af68cf0af1f2e4d9defd37bda2218d70e2aa7b
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/3542
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Also move BIO_print_errors_fp up a level so it's less repetitive. There's
enough exit points now that it doesn't seem like adding a separate return exit
code for each has held up. (Maybe there should be a macro that samples
__LINE__...)
Change-Id: I120e59caaa96185e80cf51ea801a5e1f149b1b39
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/3530
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Tighten up the requirements for False Start. At this point, neither
AES-CBC or RC4 are something that we want to use unless we're sure that
the server wants to speak them.
Rebase of original CL at: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/#/c/1980/
BUG=427721
Change-Id: I9ef7a596edeb8df1ed070aac67c315b94f3cc77f
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/3501
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Also adds a flag to runner.go to make it more suitable for printing to a pipe.
Change-Id: I26fae21f3e4910028f6b8bfc4821c8c595525504
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/3490
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Found while diagnosing some crashes and hangs in the malloc tests. This (and
the follow-up) get us further but does not quite let the malloc tests pass
quietly, even without valgrind. DTLS silently ignores some malloc failures
(confusion with silently dropping bad packets) which then translate to hangs.
Change-Id: Ief06a671e0973d09d2883432b89a86259e346653
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/3482
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
False Start is the name it's known by now. Deprecate the old API and expose new
ones with the new name.
Change-Id: I32d307027e178fd7d9c0069686cc046f75fdbf6f
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/3481
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
I found no users of this. We can restore it if needbe, but I don't expect
anyone to find it useful in its current form. The API is suspect for the same
reasons DTLSv1_listen was. An SSL object is stateful and assumes you already
have the endpoint separated out.
If we ever need it, server-side HelloVerifyRequest and DTLSv1_listen should be
implemented by a separate stateless listener that statelessly handles
cookieless ClientHello + HelloVerifyRequest. Once a ClientHello with a valid
cookie comes in, it sets up a stateful SSL object and passes control along to
that.
Change-Id: I86adc1dfb6a81bebe987784c36ad6634a9a1b120
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/3480
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Found by running malloc tests with -valgrind. Unfortunately, the next one is
deep in crypto/asn1 itself, so I'm going to stop here for now.
Change-Id: I7a33971ee07c6b7b7a98715f2f18e0f29380c0a1
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/3350
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
We have a stateful object hanging off the SSL* now. May as well use it and
avoid having to remember to reset that.
Change-Id: I5fc5269aa9b158517dd551036e658afaa2ef9acd
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/3349
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
It's currently a mix of GoogleCPlusPlusStyle and unix_hacker_style. Since it's
now been thoroughly C++-ified, let's go with the former. This also matches the
tool, our other bit of C++ code.
Change-Id: Ie90a166006aae3b8f41628dbb35fcd64e99205df
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/3348
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Start exercising the various async callbacks, starting with channel ID. These
will run under the existing state machine coverage tests; -async will also
enable every asynchronous callback we can.
Change-Id: I173148d93d3a9c575b3abc3e2aceb77968b88f0e
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/3342
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
bssl_shim rather needs it. It doesn't even free the SSL* properly most of the
time. Now that it does, this opens the door to running malloc tests under
a leak checker (because it's just not slow enough right now).
Change-Id: I37d2004de27180c41b42a6d9e5aea02caf9b8b32
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/3340
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
This is consistent with ignoring writeRecord failures. Without doing this, the
DTLS MinimumVersion test now flakily fails with:
FAILED (MinimumVersion-Client-TLS12-TLS1-DTLS)
bad error (wanted ':UNSUPPORTED_PROTOCOL:' / 'remote error: protocol version not supported'): local error 'write unix @: broken pipe', child error 'exit status 2', stdout:
2092242157:error:1007b1a7:SSL routines:ssl3_get_server_hello:UNSUPPORTED_PROTOCOL:../ssl/s3_clnt.c:783:
This is because the MinimumVersion tests assert on /both/ expectedError and
expectedLocalError. The latter is valuable as it asserts on the alert the peer
returned. (I would like us to add more such assertions to our tests where
appropriate.) However, after we send ServerHello, we also send a few messages
following it. This races with the peer shutdown and we sometimes get EPIPE
before reading the alert.
Change-Id: I3fe37940a6a531379673a00976035f8e76e0f825
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/3337
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
It may take up to two iterations of s->handshake_func before it is safe to
continue. Fortunately, even if anything was using False Start this way
(Chromium doesn't), we don't inherit NSS's security bug. The "redundant" check
in the type match case later on in this function saves us.
Amusingly, the success case still worked before this fix. Even though we fall
through to the post-handshake codepath and get a handshake record while
"expecting" app data, the handshake state machine is still pumped thanks to a
codepath meant for renego!
Change-Id: Ie129d83ac1451ad4947c4f86380879db8a3fd924
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/3335
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
The new V2ClientHello sniff asserts, for safety, that nothing else has
initialized the record layer before it runs. However, OpenSSL allows you to
avoid explicitly calling SSL_connect/SSL_accept and instead let
SSL_read/SSL_write implicitly handshake for you. This check happens at a fairly
low-level in the ssl3_read_bytes function, at which point the record layer has
already been initialized.
Add some tests to ensure this mode works.
(Later we'll lift the handshake check to a higher-level which is probably
simpler.)
Change-Id: Ibeb7fb78e5eb75af5411ba15799248d94f12820b
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/3334
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
This works fine, but I believe NSS had a bug here a couple years ago. Also move
all the Skip* bug options next to each other in order.
Change-Id: I72dcb3babeee7ba73b3d7dc5ebef2e2298e37438
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/3333
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>
SSL_AEAD_CTX ownership is currently too confusing. Instead, rely on the lack of
renego, so the previous epoch always uses the NULL cipher. (Were we to support
DTLS renego, we could keep track of s->d1->last_aead_write_ctx like
s->d1->last_write_sequence, but it isn't worth it.)
Buffered messages also tracked an old s->session, but this is unnecessary. The
s->session NULL check in tls1_enc dates to the OpenSSL initial commit and is
redundant with the aead NULL check.
Change-Id: I9a510468d95934c65bca4979094551c7536980ae
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/3234
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Nothing recognized through those codepaths is fragmentable in DTLS. Also remove
an unnecessary epoch check. It's not possible to process a record from the
wrong epoch.
Change-Id: I9d0f592860bb096563e2bdcd2c8e50a0d2b65f59
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/3232
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
