* mbedtls-2.1:
Fix typo in asn1.h
Improve leap year test names in x509parse.data
Correctly handle leap year in x509_date_is_valid()
Renegotiation: Add tests for SigAlg ext parsing
Parse Signature Algorithm ext when renegotiating
Fix changelog for ssl_server2.c usage fix
Fix ssl_server2 sample application prompt
Update ChangeLog for fix to #836
Enhance documentation of ssl_write_hostname_ext, adapt ChangeLog.
Enhance documentation of mbedtls_ssl_set_hostname
Add test case calling ssl_set_hostname twice
Make mbedtls_ssl_set_hostname safe to be called multiple times
Fix typo in configs/README.txt file
Previously, if `MBEDTLS_SSL_RENEGOTIATION` was disabled, incoming handshake
messages in `mbedtls_ssl_read` (expecting application data) lead to the
connection being closed. This commit fixes this, restricting the
`MBEDTLS_SSL_RENEGOTIATION`-guard to the code-paths responsible for accepting
renegotiation requests and aborting renegotiation attempts after too many
unexpected records have been received.
This commit fixes the following case: If a client is both expecting a
SERVER_HELLO and has an application data record that's partially
processed in flight (that's the situation the client gets into after
receiving a ServerHelloRequest followed by ApplicationData), a
subsequent call to mbedtls_ssl_read will set keep_current_message = 1
when seeing the unexpected application data, but not reset it to 0
after the application data has been processed. This commit fixes this.
This commit adds a hard assertion to mbedtls_ssl_read_record_layer
triggering if both ssl->in_hslen and ssl->in_offt are not 0. This
should never happen, and if it does, there's no sensible way of
telling whether the previous message was a handshake or an application
data message.
There are situations in which it is not clear what message to expect
next. For example, the message following the ServerHello might be
either a Certificate, a ServerKeyExchange or a CertificateRequest. We
deal with this situation in the following way: Initially, the message
processing function for one of the allowed message types is called,
which fetches and decodes a new message. If that message is not the
expected one, the function returns successfully (instead of throwing
an error as usual for unexpected messages), and the handshake
continues to the processing function for the next possible message. To
not have this function fetch a new message, a flag in the SSL context
structure is used to indicate that the last message was retained for
further processing, and if that's set, the following processing
function will not fetch a new record.
This commit simplifies the usage of this message-retaining parameter
by doing the check within the record-fetching routine instead of the
specific message-processing routines. The code gets cleaner this way
and allows retaining messages to be used in other situations as well
without much effort. This will be used in the next commits.
This commit adds four tests to tests/ssl-opt.sh:
(1) & (2): Check behaviour of optional/required verification when the
trusted CA chain is empty.
(3) & (4): Check behaviour of optional/required verification when the
client receives a server certificate with an unsupported curve.
This commit changes the behaviour of mbedtls_ssl_parse_certificate
to make the two authentication modes MBEDTLS_SSL_VERIFY_REQUIRED and
MBEDTLS_SSL_VERIFY_OPTIONAL be in the following relationship:
Mode == MBEDTLS_SSL_VERIFY_REQUIRED
<=> Mode == MBEDTLS_SSL_VERIFY_OPTIONAL + check verify result
Also, it changes the behaviour to perform the certificate chain
verification even if the trusted CA chain is empty. Previously, the
function failed in this case, even when using optional verification,
which was brought up in #864.
By default, keep allowing SHA-1 in key exchange signatures. Disabling
it causes compatibility issues, especially with clients that use
TLS1.2 but don't send the signature_algorithms extension.
SHA-1 is forbidden in certificates by default, since it's vulnerable
to offline collision-based attacks.
Default to forbidding the use of SHA-1 in TLS where it is unsafe: for
certificate signing, and as the signature hash algorithm for the TLS
1.2 handshake signature. SHA-1 remains allowed in HMAC-SHA-1 in the
XXX_SHA ciphersuites and in the PRF for TLS <= 1.1.
For easy backward compatibility for use in controlled environments,
turn on the MBEDTLS_TLS_DEFAULT_ALLOW_SHA1 compiled-time option.
This commit changes `ssl_parse_signature_algorithms_ext` to remember
one suitable ( := supported by client and by our config ) hash
algorithm per signature algorithm.
It also modifies the ciphersuite checking function
`ssl_ciphersuite_match` to refuse a suite if there
is no suitable hash algorithm.
Finally, it adds the corresponding entry to the ChangeLog.
Fix an incorrect condition in ssl_check_ctr_renegotiate() that compared
64 bits of record counter instead of 48 bits as described in RFC 6347
Section 4.3.1. This would cause the function's return value to be
occasionally incorrect and the renegotiation routines to be triggered
at unexpected times.
Fixes many typos, and errors in comments.
* Clarifies many comments
* Grammar correction in config.pl help text
* Removed comment about MBEDTLS_X509_EXT_NS_CERT_TYPE.
* Comment typo fix (Dont => Don't)
* Comment typo fix (assure => ensure)
* Comment typo fix (byes => bytes)
* Added citation for quoted standard
* Comment typo fix (one complement => 1's complement)
The is some debate about whether to prefer "one's complement", "ones'
complement", or "1's complement". The more recent RFCs related to TLS
(RFC 6347, RFC 4347, etc) use " 1's complement", so I followed that
convention.
* Added missing ")" in comment
* Comment alignment
* Incorrect comment after #endif
In a USENIX WOOT '16 paper the authors warn about a security risk
of random Initialisation Vectors (IV) repeating values.
The MBEDTLS_SSL_AEAD_RANDOM_IV feature is affected by this risk and
it isn't compliant with RFC5116. Furthermore, strictly speaking it
is a different cipher suite from the TLS (RFC5246) point of view.
Removing the MBEDTLS_SSL_AEAD_RANDOM_IV feature to resolve the above
problems.
Hanno Böck, Aaron Zauner, Sean Devlin, Juraj Somorovsky and Philipp
Jovanovic, "Nonce-Disrespecting Adversaries: Practical Forgery Attacks
on GCM in TLS", USENIX WOOT '16
When the peer retransmits a flight with many record in the same datagram, and
we already saw one of the records in that datagram, we used to drop the whole
datagram, resulting in interoperability failure (spurious handshake timeouts,
due to ignoring record retransmitted by the peer) with some implementations
(issues with Chrome were reported).
So in those cases, we want to only drop the current record, and look at the
following records (if any) in the same datagram. OTOH, this is not something
we always want to do, as sometime the header of the current record is not
reliable enough.
This commit introduces a new return code for ssl_parse_header() that allows to
distinguish if we should drop only the current record or the whole datagram,
and uses it in mbedtls_ssl_read_record()
fixes#345
Not a security issue as here we know the buffer is large enough (unless
something else if badly wrong in the code), and the value cast to int is less
than 2^16 (again, unless issues elsewhere).
Still changing to a more correct check as a matter of principle
fixes#310
Actually all key exchanges that use a certificate use signatures too, and
there is no key exchange that uses signatures but no cert, so merge those two
flags.
Conflicts:
ChangeLog
Especially for resumed handshake, it's entirely possible for an epoch=0
ClientHello to be retransmitted or arrive so late that the server is already
at epoch=1. There is no good way to detect whether it's that or a reconnect.
However:
- a late ClientHello seems more likely that client going down and then up
again in the middle of a handshake
- even if that's the case, we'll time out on that handshake soon enough
- we don't want to break handshake flows that used to work
So the safest option is to not treat that as a reconnect.
Don't depend on srv.c in config.h, but add explicit checks. This is more
in line with other options that only make sense server-side, and also it
allows to test full config minus srv.c more easily.
Use a custom function that minimally parses the message an creates a reply
without the overhead of a full SSL context.
Also fix dependencies: needs DTLS_HELLO_VERIFY for the cookie types, and let's
also depend on SRV_C as is doesn't make sense on client.
