The SSL_IS_TLS13() macro wasn't quite right. It would come back with true
in the case where we haven't yet negotiated TLSv1.3, but it could be
negotiated.
Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
This is a major overhaul of the TLSv1.3 state machine. Currently it still
looks like TLSv1.2. This commit changes things around so that it starts
to look a bit less like TLSv1.2 and bit more like TLSv1.3.
After this commit we have:
ClientHello
+ key_share ---->
ServerHello
+key_share
{CertificateRequest*}
{Certificate*}
{CertificateStatus*}
<---- {Finished}
{Certificate*}
{CertificateVerify*}
{Finished} ---->
[ApplicationData] <---> [Application Data]
Key differences between this intermediate position and the final TLSv1.3
position are:
- No EncryptedExtensions message yet
- No server side CertificateVerify message yet
- CertificateStatus still exists as a separate message
- A number of the messages are still in the TLSv1.2 format
- Still running on the TLSv1.2 record layer
Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
The previous commits put in place the logic to exchange key_share data. We
now need to do something with that information. In <= TLSv1.2 the equivalent
of the key_share extension is the ServerKeyExchange and ClientKeyExchange
messages. With key_share those two messages are no longer necessary.
The commit removes the SKE and CKE messages from the TLSv1.3 state machine.
TLSv1.3 is completely different to TLSv1.2 in the messages that it sends
and the transitions that are allowed. Therefore, rather than extend the
existing <=TLS1.2 state transition functions, we create a whole new set for
TLSv1.3. Intially these are still based on the TLSv1.2 ones, but over time
they will be amended.
The new TLSv1.3 transitions remove SKE and CKE completely. There's also some
cleanup for some stuff which is not relevant to TLSv1.3 and is easy to
remove, e.g. the DTLS support (we're not doing DTLSv1.3 yet) and NPN.
I also disable EXTMS for TLSv1.3. Using it was causing some added
complexity, so rather than fix it I removed it, since eventually it will not
be needed anyway.
Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
This is a skin deep change, which simply renames most places where we talk
about curves in a TLS context to groups. This is because TLS1.3 has renamed
the extension, and it can now include DH groups too. We still only support
curves, but this rename should pave the way for a future extension for DH
groups.
Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
Nothing is using this yet, it just adds the underlying functions necesary
for generating the TLS1.3 secrets.
Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
There were a few places where they could be declared const so this commit
does that.
Reviewed-by: Kurt Roeckx <kurt@openssl.org>
Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
Travis is reporting one file at a time shadowed variable warnings where
"read" has been used. This attempts to go through all of libssl and replace
"read" with "readbytes" to fix all the problems in one go.
Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
We add ssl_cipher_get_overhead() as an internal function, to avoid
having too much ciphersuite-specific knowledge in DTLS_get_data_mtu()
itself. It's going to need adjustment for TLSv1.3... but then again, so
is fairly much *all* of the SSL_CIPHER handling. This bit is in the noise.
Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
Reviewed-by: Matt Caswell <matt@openssl.org>
Includes addition of the various options to s_server/s_client. Also adds
one of the new TLS1.3 ciphersuites.
This isn't "real" TLS1.3!! It's identical to TLS1.2 apart from the protocol
and the ciphersuite...and the ciphersuite is just a renamed TLS1.2 one (not
a "real" TLS1.3 ciphersuite).
Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
Ensure all message types work the same way including CCS so that the state
machine doesn't need to know about special cases. Put all the special logic
into ssl_set_handshake_header() and ssl_close_construct_packet().
Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
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: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
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: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
Remove the old ssl_set_handshake_header() implementations. Later we will
rename ssl_set_handshake_header2() to ssl_set_handshake_header().
Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
This was a temporary function needed during the conversion to WPACKET. All
callers have now been converted to the new way of doing this so this
function is no longer required.
Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
Some functions were being called from both code that used WPACKETs and code
that did not. Now that more code has been converted to use WPACKETs some of
that duplication can be removed.
Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
We actually construct a HelloVerifyRequest in two places with common code
pulled into a single function. This one commit handles both places.
Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
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: Richard Levitte <levitte@openssl.org>
Run util/openssl-format-source on ssl/
Some comments and hand-formatted tables were fixed up
manually by disabling auto-formatting.
Reviewed-by: Rich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
