[erlang-questions] SSL Out of Order Cert Chain Question (9.2)
Michael Viveros
michaelviveros@REDACTED
Mon Feb 24 16:00:59 CET 2020
Any update?
On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 5:18 PM Michael Viveros <michaelviveros@REDACTED>
wrote:
> OTP-22.2 fixed certificate chains with out-of-order certificates but
> certificate chains with duplicate certificates still don't work. Duplicate
> seems like a subset of out-of-order and I've seen quite a few endpoints
> with duplicate certificates so could we fix this as well?
>
> Here's an example using the host inputs.alooma.com:
>
> $ openssl s_client -connect inputs.alooma.com:443
> ...
> Certificate chain
> 0 s:/C=US/ST=California/L=Mountain View/O=Google LLC/CN=*.alooma.com
> i:/C=US/O=Google Trust Services/CN=GTS CA 1O1
> 1 s:/C=US/ST=California/L=Mountain View/O=Google LLC/CN=*.alooma.com
> i:/C=US/O=Google Trust Services/CN=GTS CA 1O1
> 2 s:/C=US/O=Google Trust Services/CN=GTS CA 1O1
> i:/OU=GlobalSign Root CA - R2/O=GlobalSign/CN=GlobalSign
>
> $ erl
> Erlang/OTP 22 [erts-10.6] [source] [64-bit] [smp:4:4] [ds:4:4:10]
> [async-threads:1] [hipe]
>
> Eshell V10.6 (abort with ^G)
> 1> c(ssl).
> Recompiling
> /Users/mviveros/.asdf/installs/erlang/22.2/lib/ssl-9.5/src/ssl.erl
> {ok,ssl}
> 2> ssl:start().
> ok
> 3> ssl:connect("inputs.alooma.com", 443, [{cacertfile,
> "/etc/ssl/cert.pem"}, {reuse_sessions, false}, {server_name_indication, "
> inputs.alooma.com"}, {verify, verify_peer}, {depth, 99}]).
> =NOTICE REPORT==== 19-Feb-2020::17:16:43.559370 ===
> TLS client: In state certify at ssl_handshake.erl:1768 generated CLIENT
> ALERT: Fatal - Handshake Failure
> - {bad_cert,invalid_key_usage}
> {error,{tls_alert,{handshake_failure,"TLS client: In state certify at
> ssl_handshake.erl:1768 generated CLIENT ALERT: Fatal - Handshake Failure\n
> {bad_cert,invalid_key_usage}"}}}
>
> On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 5:00 PM Michael Viveros <michaelviveros@REDACTED>
> wrote:
>
>> Heard back from Ingela and she confirmed it will be part of OTP-22.2 and
>> OTP-23.0 as opposed to being a patch to OTP-21 (since it's not a
>> vulnerability or critical bug).
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 20, 2019 at 9:22 PM Michael Viveros <michaelviveros@REDACTED>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Any update about next steps, Ingela?
>>>
>>> On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 5:47 PM Michael Viveros <
>>> michaelviveros@REDACTED> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Just confirmed your fix worked!
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Nov 11, 2019 at 6:16 PM Michael Viveros <
>>>> michaelviveros@REDACTED> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Great news, thanks Ingela! I tried confirming the fix on my end but
>>>>> I'm an Erlang noob so it's taking me awhile, will try again tomorrow.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Nov 11, 2019 at 5:17 AM Ingela Andin <ingela.andin@REDACTED>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have a patch that solves the problem. I have pushed it to my
>>>>>> gitrepo
>>>>>> https://github.com/IngelaAndin/otp/tree/ingela/ssl/unorded-chain
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I had to set the options {depth, 2} and {customize_hostname_check,
>>>>>> [{match_fun, CustomFun}]
>>>>>> where CustomFun = public_key:pkix_verify_hostname_match_fun(https)
>>>>>> as the peer certificate is a wildcard cert.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regard Ingela Erlang/OTP team
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Den fre 8 nov. 2019 kl 21:46 skrev Curtis J Schofield <curtis@REDACTED
>>>>>> >:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Oh this is wonderful news!! Glad you were able to identify the code
>>>>>>> not reached !!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Deeply appreciate your support and expertise!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>> Curtis
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sent from ProtonMail Mobile
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Fri, Nov 8, 2019 at 12:15 PM, Ingela Andin <
>>>>>>> ingela.andin@REDACTED> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think I am on to the problem, we have only whitebox tested the
>>>>>>> unorded chain functionality (we intend to create a blackbox but that is a
>>>>>>> bigger job as we need to find some introp software that can create such
>>>>>>> chains or create a simulation modle),
>>>>>>> so I am positive I found that we do not reach the code for sorting
>>>>>>> the chain. I will try to fix it next week. It is easier now that I at
>>>>>>> least I got a server that I can manually blackbox test with :)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards Ingela Erlang/OTP Team - Ericsson AB
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Den tors 7 nov. 2019 kl 20:53 skrev Ingela Andin <
>>>>>>> ingela.andin@REDACTED>:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Den tors 7 nov. 2019 kl 19:35 skrev Michael Viveros <
>>>>>>>> michaelviveros@REDACTED>:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi Ingela,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Curtis' example server from his first message, hooks.glip.com,
>>>>>>>>> presents its certificates out-of-order. The correct order is Peer ->
>>>>>>>>> Intermediate CA 1 - > Intermediate CA 2 -> Root CA but they get presented
>>>>>>>>> as Peer -> Root CA -> Intermediate CA 2 -> Intermediate CA 1 and this
>>>>>>>>> returns the "Unknown CA" error. You can confirm this by running `openssl
>>>>>>>>> s_client -connect hooks.glip.com:443`.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yes I agree that this is an out of order chain, in contrast to the
>>>>>>>> social.fluffel.io. I will look into it at work tomorrow.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Regards Ingela Erlang/OTP Team - Ericsson AB
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 1:23 PM Curtis J Schofield <curtis@REDACTED>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hi Ingela
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Thank you for your attention- perhaps Micheal can explain this
>>>>>>>>>> better..
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Sent from ProtonMail Mobile
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 6:55 AM, Ingela Andin <
>>>>>>>>>> ingela.andin@REDACTED> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hi!
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I tried this out and it is not out of order, it sends the peer
>>>>>>>>>> cert followed by the intermediate cert repeated, that is the chain looks
>>>>>>>>>> like [Peer, CA1, CA1].
>>>>>>>>>> Looking at TLS-1.3 RFC it looks like extra certs should ignored
>>>>>>>>>> too, so I suppose we need to add that.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Regards Ingela Erlang/OTP team - Ericsson AB
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Den lör 2 nov. 2019 kl 15:24 skrev Mark Reynolds <beastie@REDACTED>:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Hey,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I confirm that out of order certs does not seems to be fixed,
>>>>>>>>>>> and it fails with 'Unknown CA' error:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> iex(2)> :hackney.get("https://social.fluffel.io")
>>>>>>>>>>> {:error,
>>>>>>>>>>> {:tls_alert, {:unknown_ca, 'received CLIENT ALERT: Fatal -
>>>>>>>>>>> Unknown CA'}}}
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> the only issue with this server TLS certificates is the chain
>>>>>>>>>>> order (CA is Letsencrypt):
>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.ssllabs.com/ssltest/analyze.html?d=social.fluffel.io
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Nov 2, 2019, at 01:12, Curtis J Schofield wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi!
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Just curious if there is an update on out of order certs.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The example has id0, id1, id2, id3 certs with id1 being the
>>>>>>>>>>> natural
>>>>>>>>>>> root of id2 who is the root of id3, who is the root of id0.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> We can correct the out of order problem by including id1,id2,id3
>>>>>>>>>>> certs
>>>>>>>>>>> in our chain.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> It would be nice to hear from the erlang maintainers around what
>>>>>>>>>>> kind of
>>>>>>>>>>> "out of order" erlang can handle nicely and if there is planned
>>>>>>>>>>> support for
>>>>>>>>>>> our case!
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you again,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Curtis.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Sent through ProtonMail <https://protonmail.com> Encrypted
>>>>>>>>>>> Email Channel.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, October 19, 2019 4:34 PM, Curtis J Schofield
>>>>>>>>>>> <curtis@REDACTED> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi! Thank you.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I included the root cert in the example. The root cert is id1 in
>>>>>>>>>>> cert chain - this is evident in the other file.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> It seems because the root cert is out of order - the cert chain
>>>>>>>>>>> is invalid - IIRC this may be true for tls1.2 - however the negotiation is
>>>>>>>>>>> at TLS1.2
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you for your consideration!
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Sent from ProtonMail Mobile
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Oct 19, 2019 at 10:51 AM, Ingela Andin <
>>>>>>>>>>> ingela.andin@REDACTED> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi!
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "Unknown CA" means that you did not have the ROOT certificate
>>>>>>>>>>> of the chian in your "trusted store" (cacerts option).
>>>>>>>>>>> If you do not own the ROOT certificate you can not trust the
>>>>>>>>>>> chain.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Regards Ingela Erlang/OTP Team - Ericsson AB
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Den fre 18 okt. 2019 kl 21:52 skrev Curtis J Schofield
>>>>>>>>>>> <curtis@REDACTED>:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Dear Erlang Questions:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> SSL 9.0.2 mentions a patch to fix out of order cert chains
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> In SSL 9.2 we have a root CA and an out of order cert chain
>>>>>>>>>>> for host hooks.glip.com.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> When we try to verify peer with the out of order cert
>>>>>>>>>>> chain we get 'Unknown CA'.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Is this expected behaviour for Erlang SSL 9.2 with verify_peer ?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The http://erlang.org/doc/apps/ssl/notes.html#ssl-9.0.2 notes
>>>>>>>>>>> mention that other care may need to be taken to ensure
>>>>>>>>>>> compatibility.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Reproduce error:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/robotarmy/out-of-order-ssl
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you,
>>>>>>>>>>> Curtis and Team DevEco
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Sent through ProtonMail Encrypted Email Channel.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>> erlang-questions mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>> erlang-questions@REDACTED
>>>>>>>>>>> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/attachments/20200224/ccca83b6/attachment.htm>
More information about the erlang-questions
mailing list