Skip to content
  1. Nov 15, 2016
  2. Nov 14, 2016
  3. Nov 13, 2016
  4. Nov 12, 2016
  5. Nov 11, 2016
  6. Nov 10, 2016
  7. Nov 09, 2016
  8. Nov 08, 2016
  9. Nov 07, 2016
    • FdaSilvaYY's avatar
      Allow null in X509_CRL_METHOD_free · 6fa4d63d
      FdaSilvaYY authored
      
      
      and fix documentation.
      
      Reviewed-by: default avatarTim Hudson <tjh@openssl.org>
      Reviewed-by: default avatarRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
      (Merged from https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/1634)
      (cherry picked from commit 7cb1ecec)
      6fa4d63d
    • Andrea Grandi's avatar
      Improve PRF documentation · 28304b12
      Andrea Grandi authored
      
      
      Reviewed-by: default avatarKurt Roeckx <kurt@roeckx.be>
      Reviewed-by: default avatarRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
      
      GH: #1834
      (cherry picked from commit 27ed73a9)
      28304b12
    • David Benjamin's avatar
      Improve RSA test coverage. · b9ddc5fd
      David Benjamin authored
      MD5/SHA1 and MDC-2 have special-case logic beyond the generic DigestInfo
      wrapping. Test that each of these works, including hash and length
      mismatches (both input and signature). Also add VerifyRecover tests. It
      appears 5824cc29
      
       added support for
      VerifyRecover, but forgot to add the test data.
      
      Reviewed-by: default avatarKurt Roeckx <kurt@roeckx.be>
      Reviewed-by: default avatarRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
      
      GH: #1474
      (cherry picked from commit f3205557)
      b9ddc5fd
    • David Benjamin's avatar
      Make RSA_sign.pod less confusing. · 439530bc
      David Benjamin authored
      
      
      PKCS #1 v2.0 is the name of a document which specifies an algorithm
      RSASSA-PKCS1-v1_5, often referred to as "PKCS #1 v1.5" after an earlier
      document which specified it. This gets further confusing because the
      document PKCS #1 v2.1 specifies two signature algorithms,
      RSASSA-PKCS1-v1_5 and RSASSA-PSS. RSA_sign implements RSASSA-PKCS1-v1_5.
      
      Refer to the document using the RFC number which is easier to find
      anyway, and refer to the algorithm by its name.
      
      Reviewed-by: default avatarKurt Roeckx <kurt@roeckx.be>
      Reviewed-by: default avatarRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
      
      GH: #1474
      (cherry picked from commit aa90ca11)
      439530bc
    • David Benjamin's avatar
      Implement RSASSA-PKCS1-v1_5 as specified. · b71079a3
      David Benjamin authored
      RFC 3447, section 8.2.2, steps 3 and 4 states that verifiers must encode
      the DigestInfo struct and then compare the result against the public key
      operation result. This implies that one and only one encoding is legal.
      
      OpenSSL instead parses with crypto/asn1, then checks that the encoding
      round-trips, and allows some variations for the parameter. Sufficient
      laxness in this area can allow signature forgeries, as described in
      https://www.imperialviolet.org/2014/09/26/pkcs1.html
      
      Although there aren't known attacks against OpenSSL's current scheme,
      this change makes OpenSSL implement the algorithm as specified. This
      avoids the uncertainty and, more importantly, helps grow a healthy
      ecosystem. Laxness beyond the spec, particularly in implementations
      which enjoy wide use, risks harm to the ecosystem for all. A signature
      producer which only tests against OpenSSL may not notice bugs and
      accidentally become widely deployed. Thus implementations have a
      responsibility to honor the specification as tightly as is practical.
      
      In some cases, the damage is permanent and the spec deviation and
      security risk becomes a tax all implementors must forever pay, but not
      here. Both BoringSSL and Go successfully implemented and deployed
      RSASSA-PKCS1-v1_5 as specified since their respective beginnings, so
      this change should be compatible enough to pin down in future OpenSSL
      releases.
      
      See also https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-thomson-postel-was-wrong-00
      
      
      
      As a bonus, by not having to deal with sign/verify differences, this
      version is also somewhat clearer. It also more consistently enforces
      digest lengths in the verify_recover codepath. The NID_md5_sha1 codepath
      wasn't quite doing this right.
      
      Reviewed-by: default avatarKurt Roeckx <kurt@roeckx.be>
      Reviewed-by: default avatarRich Salz <rsalz@openssl.org>
      
      GH: #1474
      (cherry picked from commit 608a0264)
      b71079a3