In the ecdsa.c sample application we don't use hashing, we use ecdsa
directly on a buffer containing plain text. Although the text explains
that it should be the message hash it still can be confusing.
Any misunderstandings here are potentially very dangerous, because ECDSA
truncates the message hash if necessary and this can lead to trivial
signature forgeries if the API is misused and the message is passed
directly to the function without hashing.
This commit adds a hash computation step to the ecdsa.c sample
application and clarification to the doxygen documentation of the
ECDSA functions involved.
By default, keep allowing SHA-1 in key exchange signatures. Disabling
it causes compatibility issues, especially with clients that use
TLS1.2 but don't send the signature_algorithms extension.
SHA-1 is forbidden in certificates by default, since it's vulnerable
to offline collision-based attacks.
There is now one test case to validate that SHA-1 is rejected in
certificates by default, and one test case to validate that SHA-1 is
supported if MBEDTLS_TLS_DEFAULT_ALLOW_SHA1 is #defined.
Default to forbidding the use of SHA-1 in TLS where it is unsafe: for
certificate signing, and as the signature hash algorithm for the TLS
1.2 handshake signature. SHA-1 remains allowed in HMAC-SHA-1 in the
XXX_SHA ciphersuites and in the PRF for TLS <= 1.1.
For easy backward compatibility for use in controlled environments,
turn on the MBEDTLS_TLS_DEFAULT_ALLOW_SHA1 compiled-time option.
* hanno/iotssl-1241-backport-2.1:
Improve documentation
Split long lines.
Remember suitable hash function for any signature algorithm.
Introduce macros and functions to characterize certain ciphersuites.
This commit changes `ssl_parse_signature_algorithms_ext` to remember
one suitable ( := supported by client and by our config ) hash
algorithm per signature algorithm.
It also modifies the ciphersuite checking function
`ssl_ciphersuite_match` to refuse a suite if there
is no suitable hash algorithm.
Finally, it adds the corresponding entry to the ChangeLog.
The routine `mbedtls_ssl_write_server_key_exchange` heavily depends on
what kind of cipher suite is active: some don't need a
ServerKeyExchange at all, some need (EC)DH parameters but no server
signature, some require both. Each time we want to restrict a certain
piece of code to some class of ciphersuites, it is guarded by a
lengthy concatentation of configuration checks determining whether at
least one of the relevant cipher suites is enabled in the config; on
the code level, it is guarded by the check whether one of these
cipher suites is the active one.
To ease readability of the code, this commit introduces several helper
macros and helper functions that can be used to determine whether a
certain class of ciphersuites (a) is active in the config, and
(b) contains the currently present ciphersuite.
The modular inversion function hangs when provided with the modulus 1. This commit refuses this modulus with a BAD_INPUT error code. It also adds a test for this case.
Fix an incorrect condition in ssl_check_ctr_renegotiate() that compared
64 bits of record counter instead of 48 bits as described in RFC 6347
Section 4.3.1. This would cause the function's return value to be
occasionally incorrect and the renegotiation routines to be triggered
at unexpected times.
Fixes many typos, and errors in comments.
* Clarifies many comments
* Grammar correction in config.pl help text
* Removed comment about MBEDTLS_X509_EXT_NS_CERT_TYPE.
* Comment typo fix (Dont => Don't)
* Comment typo fix (assure => ensure)
* Comment typo fix (byes => bytes)
* Added citation for quoted standard
* Comment typo fix (one complement => 1's complement)
The is some debate about whether to prefer "one's complement", "ones'
complement", or "1's complement". The more recent RFCs related to TLS
(RFC 6347, RFC 4347, etc) use " 1's complement", so I followed that
convention.
* Added missing ")" in comment
* Comment alignment
* Incorrect comment after #endif
In a USENIX WOOT '16 paper the authors warn about a security risk
of random Initialisation Vectors (IV) repeating values.
The MBEDTLS_SSL_AEAD_RANDOM_IV feature is affected by this risk and
it isn't compliant with RFC5116. Furthermore, strictly speaking it
is a different cipher suite from the TLS (RFC5246) point of view.
Removing the MBEDTLS_SSL_AEAD_RANDOM_IV feature to resolve the above
problems.
Hanno Böck, Aaron Zauner, Sean Devlin, Juraj Somorovsky and Philipp
Jovanovic, "Nonce-Disrespecting Adversaries: Practical Forgery Attacks
on GCM in TLS", USENIX WOOT '16
Fix implementation and documentation missmatch for the function
arguments to mbedtls_gcm_finish(). Also, removed redundant if condition
that always evaluates to true.
When we use the same documentation for a list of #defines, we used to use a
generic name in the \def command. Use the first name of the list instead so
that doxygen stops complaining, and mention the generic name in the longer
description.
This is not entirely satisfactory as the full list of macros will not be
included in the generated doc, but it's still an improvement as at least the
first macro is documented now, with a hint that there are others.
When the peer retransmits a flight with many record in the same datagram, and
we already saw one of the records in that datagram, we used to drop the whole
datagram, resulting in interoperability failure (spurious handshake timeouts,
due to ignoring record retransmitted by the peer) with some implementations
(issues with Chrome were reported).
So in those cases, we want to only drop the current record, and look at the
following records (if any) in the same datagram. OTOH, this is not something
we always want to do, as sometime the header of the current record is not
reliable enough.
This commit introduces a new return code for ssl_parse_header() that allows to
distinguish if we should drop only the current record or the whole datagram,
and uses it in mbedtls_ssl_read_record()
fixes#345
fixes#310
Actually all key exchanges that use a certificate use signatures too, and
there is no key exchange that uses signatures but no cert, so merge those two
flags.
Conflicts:
ChangeLog
