| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
* henrik/update-copyrightyear:
update copyright-year
|
|
In TLS-1.2 The signature algorithm and the hash function algorithm
used to produce the digest that is used when creating the digital signature
may be negotiated through the signature algorithm extension RFC 5246.
We want to make these algorithm pairs configurable.
In connections using lower versions of TLS these algorithms are
implicit defined and can not be negotiated or configured.
DTLS is updated to not cause dialyzer errors, but needs to get a real
implementation later.
|
|
|
|
Previously, if certificate revocation checking was turned on, and a
certificate didn't contain a CRL Distribution Points extension, and
there was no relevant CRL in the cache, then ssl_handshake:crl_check
would accept the certificate even if the crl_check option was set to
reject certificates for which the revocation status could not be
determined. With this change, such certificates will only be accepted
if the crl_check option was set to best_effort.
The process for CRL validation is described in section 6.3 of RFC
5280. The text doesn't mention any special treatment to be given to
certificates without distribution points: it just says "For each
distribution point..." (section 6.3.3), which would leave the
revocation status undetermined, unless there were "any available CRLs
not specified in a distribution point but issued by the certificate
issuer". Thus the result of this algorithm should be UNDETERMINED in
this case, not UNREVOKED, and the crl_check option should govern how
the implementation reacts to this result.
|
|
|
|
Conflicts:
OTP_VERSION
lib/inets/test/httpd_SUITE.erl
lib/inets/vsn.mk
lib/ssh/src/ssh.erl
lib/ssh/vsn.mk
lib/ssl/src/ssl.appup.src
lib/ssl/vsn.mk
|
|
alert records needs to be thrown from
ssl_handshake:premaster_secret/[2/3] so that operations will end up in
the catch clause of the invokation of certify_client_key_exchange/3 in
ssl_connection.erl, and hence terminate gracefully and not continue to try
and calculate the master secret with invalid inputs and crash.
|
|
pre TLS 1.2 server should ignore the signature_algorithms extension.
The server code would attempt to select the signature/hash algorithm
even when using TLS 1.0 or 1.1. Instead it should simply use the default
algorithm on those versions.
|
|
|
|
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+.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Check that the certificate chain ends with a trusted ROOT CA e.i. a
self-signed certificate, but provide an option partial_chain to
enable the application to define an intermediat CA as trusted.
TLS RFC says:
"unknown_ca
A valid certificate chain or partial chain was received, but the
certificate was not accepted because the CA certificate could not
be located or couldn't be matched with a known, trusted CA. This
message is always fatal."
and also states:
"certificate_list
This is a sequence (chain) of certificates. The sender's
certificate MUST come first in the list. Each following
certificate MUST directly certify the one preceding it. Because
certificate validation requires that root keys be distributed
independently, the self-signed certificate that specifies the root
certificate authority MAY be omitted from the chain, under the
assumption that the remote end must already possess it in order to
validate it in any case."
X509 RFC says:
"The selection of a trust anchor is a matter of policy: it could be
the top CA in a hierarchical PKI, the CA that issued the verifier's
own certificate(s), or any other CA in a network PKI. The path
validation procedure is the same regardless of the choice of trust
anchor. In addition, different applications may rely on different
trust anchors, or may accept paths that begin with any of a set of
trust anchors."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FROM TLS 1.2 RFC:
The interaction of the certificate_types and
supported_signature_algorithms fields is somewhat complicated.
certificate_types has been present in TLS since SSLv3, but was
somewhat underspecified. Much of its functionality is superseded by
supported_signature_algorithms. The following rules apply:
- Any certificates provided by the client MUST be signed using a
hash/signature algorithm pair found in
supported_signature_algorithms.
- The end-entity certificate provided by the client MUST contain a
key that is compatible with certificate_types. If the key is a
signature key, it MUST be usable with some hash/signature
algorithm pair in supported_signature_algorithms.
- For historical reasons, the names of some client certificate types
include the algorithm used to sign the certificate. For example,
in earlier versions of TLS, rsa_fixed_dh meant a certificate
signed with RSA and containing a static DH key. In TLS 1.2, this
functionality has been obsoleted by the
supported_signature_algorithms, and the certificate type no longer
restricts the algorithm used to sign the certificate. For
example, if the server sends dss_fixed_dh certificate type and
{{sha1, dsa}, {sha1, rsa}} signature types, the client MAY reply
with a certificate containing a static DH key, signed with RSA-
SHA1.
|
|
|
|
Also fix DTLS call to supply its corresponding TLS version
|
|
Negotiated version is now always passed to ssl_handshake:select_hashsign
because ssl_handshake:select_cert_hashsign has different rsa defaults on
tlsv1.2 and older versions.
|
|
|
|
When selecting the available cipher suites for the server all cipher suites
for the highest supported SSL/TLS-version would be selected, and not
all supported for the negotiated SSL/TLS-version. This could lead
to that faulty clients could negotiate cipher suites that they
can not support. This change will enable the faulty client to negotiate
another cipher suite that it can support.
|
|
Conflicts:
lib/ssl/src/dtls_record.erl
|
|
crashing.
When TLS client sends Supported Elliptic Curves Client Hello Extension
the server shall select a curve supported by both sides or refuse to
negotiate the use of an ECC cipher suite.
|
|
|
|
public_key:private_key/0 was referenced but undefined, and lib/ssl had a
local definition of private_key/0.
To fix that, make the following changes:
* add public_key:private_key/0 type
* document public_key/0 and private_key/0
* fix incorrect definitions and references
|
|
* ia/Vagabond/adt-honor-cipher-order/OTP-11621:
Implement 'honor_cipher_order' SSL server-side option
|
|
did not support secure renegotiation
|
|
HonorCipherOrder as implemented in Apache, nginx, lighttpd, etc. This
instructs the server to prefer its own cipher ordering rather than the
client's and can help protect against things like BEAST while
maintaining compatability with clients which only support older ciphers.
This code is mostly written by Andrew Thompson, only the test case was
added by Andreas Schultz.
|
|
The server code erroneously took the list of curves supported by the
client from it's own hello extension, effectively breaking curve
selection all together.
Also the default fallback secp256k1 curve is not supported by
all clients. secp256r1 is recommended as part of the NIST Suite B
cryptographic suites. The chances are much better that all clients
support it, so use that as fallback.
|
|
New design : ssl - Main
tls - Reflect tls specific semantics
dtls - Reflect dtls specific semantics
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- Set to disable to explicitly disable SNI support.
- Set to a hostname when upgrading from TCP to TLS.
|
|
See RFC 6066 section 3
|
|
Also the server should only send ECC point formats extension not ECC curve
extension.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Also refactor so that TLS and DTLS can have common functions when possible.
|
|
Common functions will be located in ssl_handshake.erl while
specific functions will be located in tls_handshake.erl and dtls_handshake.erl
|
|
Also phase in tls module as main API instead of ssl. To
make API clearer. As TLS is the new protocol name.
Maybe keep some API functions in ssl
|
|
Conflicts:
lib/ssl/src/ssl.app.src
lib/ssl/src/ssl_manager.erl
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
