While a hardcoded 1.2 version is fine when we offer that in Client Hello, we
should include the actually offered version if it has been reduced before
starting the exchange.
Fixes fragment reassembling if a buffer contains more than one record, but
the last record contains a partial TLS record header. Thanks to Nick Saunders
and Jamil Nimeh for identifying this issue and providing a fix for it.
To better separate the code path for different TLS versions and modes of
operation, we introduce a TLS AEAD abstraction. We provide three implementations
using traditional transforms, and get prepared for TLS AEAD modes.
The salt, or often called implicit nonce, varies between AEAD algorithms and
their use in protocols. For IKE and ESP, GCM uses 4 bytes, while CCM uses
3 bytes. With TLS, however, AEAD mode uses 4 bytes for both GCM and CCM.
Our GCM backends currently support 4 bytes and CCM 3 bytes only. This is fine
until we go for CCM mode support in TLS, which requires 4 byte nonces.
To avoid considering each cached OCSP response and evaluating its trustchain,
we limit the certificates considered for OCSP signing to:
- The issuing CA of the checked certificate
- A directly delegated signer by the same CA, having the OCSP signer constraint
- Any locally installed (trusted) certificate having the OCSP signer constraint
The first two options cover the requirements from RFC 6960 2.6. For
compatibility with non-conforming CAs, we allow the third option as exception,
but require the installation of such certificates locally.
This behavior was introduced with 6840a6fb to avoid key/signature strength
checking for the revocation trustchain as we do it for end entity certificates.
Unfortunately this breaks CA constraint checking under certain conditions, as
we merge additional intermediate/CA certificates to the auth config.
As key/signature strength checking of the revocation trustchain is a rather
exotic requirement we drop support for that to properly enforce CA constraints.
The DH transform is optional for ESP/AH proposals. The initiator can
include NONE (0) in its proposal to indicate that while it prefers to
do a DH exchange, the responder may still decide to not do so.
Fixes#532.
This validator checks for any attribute certificate it can find for validated
end entity certificates and tries to extract group membership information
used for connection authorization rules.
We still try to calculate these directly as it can avoid a dependency on
the pkcs1 or other plugins. But for e.g. PGPv3 keys we need to delegate the
actual fingerprint calculation to the pgp plugin.
Martin Willi