- 03 10月, 2016 3 次提交
-
-
由 Matt Caswell 提交于
Move setting the handshake header up a level into the state machine code in order to reduce boilerplate. Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
-
由 Matt Caswell 提交于
Instead of initialising, finishing and cleaning up the WPACKET in every message construction function, we should do it once in write_state_machine(). Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
-
由 Matt Caswell 提交于
ssl_set_handshake_header2() was only ever a temporary name while we had to have ssl_set_handshake_header() for code that hadn't been converted to WPACKET yet. No code remains that needed that so we can rename it. Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
-
- 22 9月, 2016 1 次提交
-
-
由 Matt Caswell 提交于
A TLS message includes 3 bytes for its length in the header for the message. This would allow for messages up to 16Mb in length. Messages of this length are excessive and OpenSSL includes a check to ensure that a peer is sending reasonably sized messages in order to avoid too much memory being consumed to service a connection. A flaw in the logic of version 1.1.0 means that memory for the message is allocated too early, prior to the excessive message length check. Due to way memory is allocated in OpenSSL this could mean an attacker could force up to 21Mb to be allocated to service a connection. This could lead to a Denial of Service through memory exhaustion. However, the excessive message length check still takes place, and this would cause the connection to immediately fail. Assuming that the application calls SSL_free() on the failed conneciton in a timely manner then the 21Mb of allocated memory will then be immediately freed again. Therefore the excessive memory allocation will be transitory in nature. This then means that there is only a security impact if: 1) The application does not call SSL_free() in a timely manner in the event that the connection fails or 2) The application is working in a constrained environment where there is very little free memory or 3) The attacker initiates multiple connection attempts such that there are multiple connections in a state where memory has been allocated for the connection; SSL_free() has not yet been called; and there is insufficient memory to service the multiple requests. Except in the instance of (1) above any Denial Of Service is likely to be transitory because as soon as the connection fails the memory is subsequently freed again in the SSL_free() call. However there is an increased risk during this period of application crashes due to the lack of memory - which would then mean a more serious Denial of Service. This issue does not affect DTLS users. Issue was reported by Shi Lei (Gear Team, Qihoo 360 Inc.). CVE-2016-6307 Reviewed-by: NRichard Levitte <levitte@openssl.org>
-
- 21 9月, 2016 1 次提交
-
-
由 Matt Caswell 提交于
Reviewed-by: NRichard Levitte <levitte@openssl.org>
-
- 20 9月, 2016 4 次提交
-
-
由 Matt Caswell 提交于
All the other functions that take an argument for the number of bytes use convenience macros for this purpose. We should do the same with WPACKET_put_bytes(). Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
-
由 Matt Caswell 提交于
Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
-
由 Matt Caswell 提交于
Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
-
由 Matt Caswell 提交于
Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
-
- 14 9月, 2016 1 次提交
-
-
由 Matt Caswell 提交于
Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
-
- 13 9月, 2016 3 次提交
-
-
由 Matt Caswell 提交于
No need to declare an explicit sub-packet. Just start one. Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
-
由 Matt Caswell 提交于
To avoid confusion with the read PACKET structure. Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
-
由 Matt Caswell 提交于
Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
-
- 22 8月, 2016 1 次提交
-
-
由 Matt Caswell 提交于
DTLS can handle out of order record delivery. Additionally since handshake messages can be bigger than will fit into a single packet, the messages can be fragmented across multiple records (as with normal TLS). That means that the messages can arrive mixed up, and we have to reassemble them. We keep a queue of buffered messages that are "from the future", i.e. messages we're not ready to deal with yet but have arrived early. The messages held there may not be full yet - they could be one or more fragments that are still in the process of being reassembled. The code assumes that we will eventually complete the reassembly and when that occurs the complete message is removed from the queue at the point that we need to use it. However, DTLS is also tolerant of packet loss. To get around that DTLS messages can be retransmitted. If we receive a full (non-fragmented) message from the peer after previously having received a fragment of that message, then we ignore the message in the queue and just use the non-fragmented version. At that point the queued message will never get removed. Additionally the peer could send "future" messages that we never get to in order to complete the handshake. Each message has a sequence number (starting from 0). We will accept a message fragment for the current message sequence number, or for any sequence up to 10 into the future. However if the Finished message has a sequence number of 2, anything greater than that in the queue is just left there. So, in those two ways we can end up with "orphaned" data in the queue that will never get removed - except when the connection is closed. At that point all the queues are flushed. An attacker could seek to exploit this by filling up the queues with lots of large messages that are never going to be used in order to attempt a DoS by memory exhaustion. I will assume that we are only concerned with servers here. It does not seem reasonable to be concerned about a memory exhaustion attack on a client. They are unlikely to process enough connections for this to be an issue. A "long" handshake with many messages might be 5 messages long (in the incoming direction), e.g. ClientHello, Certificate, ClientKeyExchange, CertificateVerify, Finished. So this would be message sequence numbers 0 to 4. Additionally we can buffer up to 10 messages in the future. Therefore the maximum number of messages that an attacker could send that could get orphaned would typically be 15. The maximum size that a DTLS message is allowed to be is defined by max_cert_list, which by default is 100k. Therefore the maximum amount of "orphaned" memory per connection is 1500k. Message sequence numbers get reset after the Finished message, so renegotiation will not extend the maximum number of messages that can be orphaned per connection. As noted above, the queues do get cleared when the connection is closed. Therefore in order to mount an effective attack, an attacker would have to open many simultaneous connections. Issue reported by Quan Luo. CVE-2016-2179 Reviewed-by: NRichard Levitte <levitte@openssl.org>
-
- 18 8月, 2016 1 次提交
-
-
由 Emilia Kasper 提交于
Run util/openssl-format-source on ssl/ Some comments and hand-formatted tables were fixed up manually by disabling auto-formatting. Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
-
- 17 8月, 2016 2 次提交
-
-
由 Dr. Stephen Henson 提交于
Reviewed-by: NRichard Levitte <levitte@openssl.org>
-
由 Dr. Stephen Henson 提交于
Reviewed-by: NRichard Levitte <levitte@openssl.org>
-
- 05 8月, 2016 1 次提交
-
-
由 David Woodhouse 提交于
DTLSv1_client_method() is deprecated, but it was the only way to obtain DTLS1_BAD_VER support. The SSL_OP_CISCO_ANYCONNECT hack doesn't work with DTLS_client_method(), and it's relatively non-trivial to make it work without expanding the hack into lots of places. So deprecate SSL_OP_CISCO_ANYCONNECT with DTLSv1_client_method(), and make it work with SSL_CTX_set_{min,max}_proto_version(DTLS1_BAD_VER) instead. Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org> Reviewed-by: NMatt Caswell <matt@openssl.org>
-
- 20 7月, 2016 1 次提交
-
-
由 FdaSilvaYY 提交于
Fix some indentation at the same time Reviewed-by: NMatt Caswell <matt@openssl.org> Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org> (Merged from https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/1292)
-
- 15 7月, 2016 1 次提交
-
-
由 Dr. Stephen Henson 提交于
Reviewed-by: NRichard Levitte <levitte@openssl.org>
-
- 29 6月, 2016 1 次提交
-
-
由 FdaSilvaYY 提交于
Reviewed-by: NAndy Polyakov <appro@openssl.org> Reviewed-by: NKurt Roeckx <kurt@openssl.org> Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org> (Merged from https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/1264)
-
- 19 6月, 2016 1 次提交
-
-
由 FdaSilvaYY 提交于
Reviewed-by: NKurt Roeckx <kurt@openssl.org> Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org> (Merged from https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/1168)
-
- 20 5月, 2016 1 次提交
-
-
由 David Benjamin 提交于
ChangeCipherSpec messages have a defined value. They also may not occur in the middle of a handshake message. The current logic will accept a ChangeCipherSpec with value 2. It also would accept up to three bytes of handshake data before the ChangeCipherSpec which it would discard (because s->init_num gets reset). Instead, require that s->init_num is 0 when a ChangeCipherSpec comes in. RT#4391 Reviewed-by: NAndy Polyakov <appro@openssl.org> Reviewed-by: NMatt Caswell <matt@openssl.org>
-
- 19 5月, 2016 1 次提交
-
-
由 Viktor Dukhovni 提交于
Set ctx->error = X509_V_ERR_OUT_OF_MEM when verificaiton cannot continue due to malloc failure. Also, when X509_verify_cert() returns <= 0 make sure that the verification status does not remain X509_V_OK, as a last resort set it it to X509_V_ERR_UNSPECIFIED, just in case some code path returns an error without setting an appropriate value of ctx->error. Reviewed-by: NRichard Levitte <levitte@openssl.org>
-
- 18 5月, 2016 1 次提交
-
-
由 Rich Salz 提交于
Reviewed-by: NRichard Levitte <levitte@openssl.org> Reviewed-by: NKurt Roeckx <kurt@openssl.org>
-
- 28 3月, 2016 1 次提交
-
-
由 Fedor Indutny 提交于
We now send the highest supported version by the client, even if the session uses an older version. This fixes 2 problems: - When you try to reuse a session but the other side doesn't reuse it and uses a different protocol version the connection will fail. - When you're trying to reuse a session with an old version you might be stuck trying to reuse the old version while both sides support a newer version Signed-off-by: NKurt Roeckx <kurt@roeckx.be> Reviewed-by: NViktor Dukhovni <viktor@openssl.org> GH: #852, MR: #2452
-
- 10 3月, 2016 3 次提交
-
-
由 Kurt Roeckx 提交于
Reviewed-by: NViktor Dukhovni <viktor@openssl.org> MR: #1824
-
由 Kurt Roeckx 提交于
Reviewed-by: NViktor Dukhovni <viktor@openssl.org> MR: #1595
-
由 Kurt Roeckx 提交于
Adjust ssl_set_client_hello_version to get both the minimum and maximum and then make ssl_set_client_hello_version use the maximum version. Reviewed-by: NViktor Dukhovni <viktor@openssl.org> MR: #1595
-
- 13 2月, 2016 1 次提交
-
-
由 Viktor Dukhovni 提交于
Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
-
- 11 2月, 2016 1 次提交
-
-
由 Viktor Dukhovni 提交于
Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
-
- 27 1月, 2016 1 次提交
-
-
由 Rich Salz 提交于
This was done by the following find . -name '*.[ch]' | /tmp/pl where /tmp/pl is the following three-line script: print unless $. == 1 && m@/\* .*\.[ch] \*/@; close ARGV if eof; # Close file to reset $. And then some hand-editing of other files. Reviewed-by: NViktor Dukhovni <viktor@openssl.org>
-
- 20 1月, 2016 1 次提交
-
-
由 Dr. Stephen Henson 提交于
Reviewed-by: NRichard Levitte <levitte@openssl.org>
-
- 19 1月, 2016 1 次提交
-
-
由 Viktor Dukhovni 提交于
Some users want to disable SSL 3.0/TLS 1.0/TLS 1.1, and enable just TLS 1.2. In the future they might want to disable TLS 1.2 and enable just TLS 1.3, ... This commit makes it possible to disable any or all of the TLS or DTLS protocols. It also considerably simplifies the SSL/TLS tests, by auto-generating the min/max version tests based on the set of supported protocols (425 explicitly written out tests got replaced by two loops that generate all 425 tests if all protocols are enabled, fewer otherwise). Reviewed-by: NRichard Levitte <levitte@openssl.org>
-
- 10 1月, 2016 1 次提交
-
-
由 Kurt Roeckx 提交于
Reviewed-by: NViktor Dukhovni <openssl-users@dukhovni.org>
-
- 02 1月, 2016 1 次提交
-
-
由 Viktor Dukhovni 提交于
The protocol selection code is now consolidated in a few consecutive short functions in a single file and is table driven. Protocol-specific constraints that influence negotiation are moved into the flags field of the method structure. The same protocol version constraints are now applied in all code paths. It is now much easier to add new protocol versions without reworking the protocol selection logic. In the presence of "holes" in the list of enabled client protocols we no longer select client protocols below the hole based on a subset of the constraints and then fail shortly after when it is found that these don't meet the remaining constraints (suiteb, FIPS, security level, ...). Ideally, with the new min/max controls users will be less likely to create "holes" in the first place. Reviewed-by: NKurt Roeckx <kurt@openssl.org>
-
- 20 12月, 2015 1 次提交
-
-
由 Dr. Stephen Henson 提交于
Remove all fixed DH ciphersuites and associated logic. Reviewed-by: NMatt Caswell <matt@openssl.org>
-
- 28 11月, 2015 1 次提交
-
-
由 Matt Caswell 提交于
Various updates following feedback from the recent commit of the new GOST2012 code. Reviewed-by: NAndy Polyakov <appro@openssl.org>
-
- 24 11月, 2015 1 次提交
-
-
由 Dmitry Belyavsky 提交于
This patch contains the necessary changes to provide GOST 2012 ciphersuites in TLS. It requires the use of an external GOST 2012 engine. Reviewed-by: NMatt Caswell <matt@openssl.org> Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
-
- 06 11月, 2015 1 次提交
-
-
由 Matt Caswell 提交于
We were setting |s->renegotiate| and |s->new_session| to 0 twice in tls_finish_handshake. This is redundant so now we just do it once! Reviewed-by: NViktor Dukhovni <viktor@openssl.org>
-