Perl changes reviewed by Richard Levitte. Non-perl changes reviewed by Rich
Salz
Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
Reviewed-by: NRichard Levitte <levitte@openssl.org>

Perl changes reviewed by Richard Levitte. Non-perl changes reviewed by Rich
Salz
Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
Reviewed-by: NRichard Levitte <levitte@openssl.org>

Perl changes reviewed by Richard Levitte. Non-perl changes reviewed by Rich
Salz
Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
Reviewed-by: NRichard Levitte <levitte@openssl.org>

Perl changes reviewed by Richard Levitte. Non-perl changes reviewed by Rich
Salz
Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
Reviewed-by: NRichard Levitte <levitte@openssl.org>

The _clienthello_ in the extensions parsing functions is overly specific.
Better to keep the convention to just _client_

Perl changes reviewed by Richard Levitte. Non-perl changes reviewed by Rich
Salz
Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
Reviewed-by: NRichard Levitte <levitte@openssl.org>

This lays the foundation for a later move to have the extensions built and
placed into the correct message for TLSv1.3 (e.g. ServerHello or
EncryptedExtensions).

Perl changes reviewed by Richard Levitte. Non-perl changes reviewed by Rich
Salz
Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
Reviewed-by: NRichard Levitte <levitte@openssl.org>

Later we will have client extensions code too.

Perl changes reviewed by Richard Levitte. Non-perl changes reviewed by Rich
Salz
Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
Reviewed-by: NRichard Levitte <levitte@openssl.org>

Perl changes reviewed by Richard Levitte. Non-perl changes reviewed by Rich
Salz
Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
Reviewed-by: NRichard Levitte <levitte@openssl.org>

Add support for construction of extensions

Perl changes reviewed by Richard Levitte. Non-perl changes reviewed by Rich
Salz
Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
Reviewed-by: NRichard Levitte <levitte@openssl.org>

This builds on the work started in 1ab3836b and extends is so that
each extension has its own identified parsing functions, as well as an
allowed context identifying which messages and protocols it is relevant for.
Subsequent commits will do a similar job for the ServerHello extensions.
This will enable us to have common functions for processing extension blocks
no matter which of the multiple messages they are received from. In TLSv1.3
a number of different messages have extension blocks, and some extensions
have moved from one message to another when compared to TLSv1.2.

Perl changes reviewed by Richard Levitte. Non-perl changes reviewed by Rich
Salz
Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
Reviewed-by: NRichard Levitte <levitte@openssl.org>

Perl changes reviewed by Richard Levitte. Non-perl changes reviewed by Rich
Salz
Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
Reviewed-by: NRichard Levitte <levitte@openssl.org>

Perl changes reviewed by Richard Levitte. Non-perl changes reviewed by Rich
Salz
Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
Reviewed-by: NRichard Levitte <levitte@openssl.org>

Subsequent commits will pull other extensions code into this file.

Perl changes reviewed by Richard Levitte. Non-perl changes reviewed by Rich
Salz
Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
Reviewed-by: NRichard Levitte <levitte@openssl.org>

At this stage the message is just empty. We need to fill it in with
extension data.

Perl changes reviewed by Richard Levitte. Non-perl changes reviewed by Rich
Salz
Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
Reviewed-by: NRichard Levitte <levitte@openssl.org>

There are some minor differences in the format of a ServerHello in TLSv1.3.

Perl changes reviewed by Richard Levitte. Non-perl changes reviewed by Rich
Salz
Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
Reviewed-by: NRichard Levitte <levitte@openssl.org>

If on a non-tty stdin, TTY_get() will fail with errno == ENODEV.
We didn't catch that.
Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
(Merged from https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/2039)

TTY_get() sometimes surprises us with new errno values to determine if
we have a controling terminal or not.  This generated error is a
helpful tool to figure out that this was what happened and what the
unknown value is.
Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
(Merged from https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/2043)

Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
(Merged from https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/2040)

The best way to test the UI interface is currently by using an openssl
command that uses password_callback.  The only one that does this is
'genrsa'.
Since password_callback uses a UI method derived from UI_OpenSSL(), it
ensures that one gets tested well enough as well.
Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
(Merged from https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/2040)

Since there are many parts of UI_process() that can go wrong, it isn't
very helpful to only return -1 with no further explanation.  With this
change, the error message will at least show which part went wrong.
Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
(Merged from https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/2037)

Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>

GH: #2025

Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>

GH: #2025

Improves the readability of the code, and reduces the liklihood of errors.
Also made a few minor style changes.
Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>

Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>

Improves the readability of the code, and reduces the liklihood of errors.
Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>

Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>

At the moment the msg callback only received the record header with the
outer record type in it. We never pass the inner record type - we probably
need to at some point.
Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>

Add some tests for the new record construction
Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>

Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>

Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>

Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>

Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>

Reviewed-by: NMatt Caswell <matt@openssl.org>

The fuzzers use -DFUZZING_BUILD_MODE_UNSAFE_FOR_PRODUCTION, and actually
get different results based on that. We should have at least some
targets that actually fully use the fuzz corpora.
Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
GH: #2023

We want to be in the same global state each time we come in
FuzzerTestOneInput(). There are various reasons why we might not be that
include:
- Initialization that happens on first use. This is mostly the
  RUN_ONCE() things, or loading of error strings.
- Results that get cached. For instance a stack that is sorted, RSA
  blinding that has been set up, ...

So I try to trigger as much as possible in FuzzerInitialize(), and for
things I didn't find out how to trigger this it needs to happen in
FuzzerTestOneInput().
Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
GH: #2023

This is something you might want to change depending on the version to
use, there is no point in us fixing this to something.
Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
GH: #2023

Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
GH: #2023

Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
GH: #2023

Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
GH: #2023

Reviewed-by: NRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
GH: #2023