| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The functions are not performance critical. Will be used
when errors occurs, CRL data base is managed or legacy OpenSSL names
are used for ciphers.
|
|
It is desirable to be as specific as possible in the info message, so
there can be no mistake if the alert is form the peer or generated by
us. This use to be an error message, but it is better to make it an
info message as sending an ALERT ending the connection is an expected
behaviour.
|
|
From RFC 6347:
4.1.2.7. Handling Invalid Records
Unlike TLS, DTLS is resilient in the face of invalid records (e.g.,
invalid formatting, length, MAC, etc.). In general, invalid
records SHOULD be silently discarded, thus preserving the
association; however, an error MAY be logged for diagnostic
purposes. Implementations which choose to generate an alert
instead, MUST generate fatal level alerts to avoid attacks where
the attacker repeatedly probes the implementation to see how it
responds to various types of error. Note that if DTLS is run over
UDP, then any implementation which does this will be extremely
susceptible to denial-of-service (DoS) attacks because UDP forgery
is so easy. Thus, this practice is NOT RECOMMENDED for such
transports.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beta DTLS, not production ready. Only very basically tested, and
not everything in the SPEC is implemented and some things
are hard coded that should not be, so this implementation can not be consider
secure.
Refactor "TLS connection state" and socket handling, to facilitate
DTLS implementation.
Create dtls "listner" (multiplexor) process that spawns
DTLS connection process handlers.
Handle DTLS fragmentation.
Framework for handling retransmissions.
Replay Detection is not implemented yet.
Alerts currently always handled as in TLS.
|
|
|
|
There are a lot of cases where `ssl` application just returns unhelpful
`handshake failure` or `internal error`. This patch tries to provide
better diagnostics so operator can debug his SSL misconfiguration
without doing hardcore erlang debugging.
Here is an example escript that incorrectly uses server certificate as a
client one:
https://gist.github.com/binarin/35c34c2df7556bf04c8a878682ef3d67
With the patch it is properly reported as an error in "extended key
usage".
|
|
|
|
This commit adds support for RFC7301, application-layer protocol
negotiation. ALPN is the standard based approach to the NPN
extension, and is required for HTTP/2.
ALPN lives side by side with NPN and provides an equivalent
feature but in this case it is the server that decides what
protocol to use, not the client.
When both ALPN and NPN are sent by a client, and the server is
configured with both ALPN and NPN options, ALPN will always
take precedence. This behavior can also be found in the OpenSSL
implementation of ALPN.
ALPN and NPN share the ssl:negotiated_protocol/1 function for
retrieving the negotiated protocol. The previously existing
function ssl:negotiated_next_protocol/1 still exists, but has
been deprecated and removed from the documentation.
The tests against OpenSSL require OpenSSL version 1.0.2+.
|
|
|
|
|
|
* ia/ssl/continue-dtls-and-specs:
ssl: Avoid dialyzer warnings in dtls code
ssl: Improve type specs
ssl: Refactor and start implementing dtls_connection.erl
|
|
Conflicts:
lib/ssl/src/dtls_record.erl
|
|
unexpected alerts.
Add recognitions of RFC 4366 alerts and handle possible
unimplementd alerts in a gracefully way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
follow up enhancments done in commit
e56167dd6ca8d37d26ea7f19933691a3bda41113
Make sure format_error return good strings. Replace confusing legacy atoms
with more descriptive atoms.
|
|
Remove filter mechanisms that made error messages backwards compatible
with old ssl but hid information about what actually happened.
This does not break the documented API however other reason
terms may be returned, so code that matches on the reason part of
{error, Reason} may fail.
|
|
|
|
|
|
New ssl now supports secure renegotiation as described by RFC 5746.
|
|
|
