denozord/strongswan-ext
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

message: Fix payload type in last unprotected payload of a fragmented message

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Tobias Brunner
2022-06-29 10:28:50 +02:00
parent ba348b4799
commit c1987aefbe
1 changed files with 14 additions and 6 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files
src/libcharon/encoding/message.c
+14 -6
View File
@@ -1565,7 +1565,7 @@ static encrypted_payload_t* wrap_payloads(private_message_t *this)
}
}
if (encrypted)
{ /* simply adopt all the unencrypted payloads */
{ /* simply adopt all the unprotected payloads */
this->payloads->destroy(this->payloads);
this->payloads = payloads;
return encrypted;
@@ -1655,7 +1655,7 @@ static ike_header_t *create_header(private_message_t *this)
*
* The generator and the possible encrypted payload are returned. The latter
* is not yet encrypted (but the transform is set). It is also not added to
* the payload list (so unless there are unencrypted payloads that list will
* the payload list (so unless there are unprotected payloads that list will
* be empty afterwards).
*/
static status_t generate_message(private_message_t *this, keymat_t *keymat,
@@ -1943,7 +1943,7 @@ static message_t *create_fragment(private_message_t *this, payload_type_t next,
/* only in the first fragment is this set to the type of the first
* payload in the encrypted payload */
fragment->set_next_type(fragment, next);
/* move unencrypted payloads to the first fragment */
/* move unprotected payloads to the first fragment */
enumerator = this->payloads->create_enumerator(this->payloads);
while (enumerator->enumerate(enumerator, &payload))
{
@@ -2096,7 +2096,7 @@ METHOD(message_t, fragment, status_t,
/* padding and padding length */
frag_len = round_down(frag_len, aead->get_block_size(aead));
REDUCE_FRAG_LEN(frag_len, 1);
/* TODO-FRAG: if there are unencrypted payloads, should we account for
/* TODO-FRAG: if there are unprotected payloads, should we account for
* their length in the first fragment? we still would have to add
* an encrypted fragment payload (albeit empty), even so we couldn't
* prevent IP fragmentation in every case */
@@ -2894,7 +2894,7 @@ METHOD(message_t, add_fragment_v2, status_t,
/* the first fragment denotes the payload type of the first payload in
* the original encrypted payload, cache that */
this->first_payload = payload->get_next_type(payload);
/* move all unencrypted payloads contained in the first fragment */
/* move all unprotected payloads contained in the first fragment */
enumerator = message->create_payload_enumerator(message);
while (enumerator->enumerate(enumerator, &payload))
{
@@ -2920,10 +2920,18 @@ METHOD(message_t, add_fragment_v2, status_t,
data = merge_fragments(this, message);
/* use the cached next payload type from the SKF of the first fragment */
encrypted = encrypted_payload_create_from_plain(this->first_payload, data);
encrypted->set_transform(encrypted, aead);
if (this->payloads->get_last(this->payloads, (void**)&payload) == SUCCESS)
{ /* if there are any unprotected payloads, update the last one's next
* payload type (it points to an SKF instead of an SK) */
payload->set_next_type(payload, encrypted->payload_interface.get_type(
&encrypted->payload_interface));
}
this->payloads->insert_last(this->payloads, encrypted);
/* update next payload type (could be an unencrypted payload) */
/* update payload type in the header (could be an unprotected payload) */
this->payloads->get_first(this->payloads, (void**)&payload);
this->first_payload = payload->get_type(payload);