As is, they were fully vulnerable to the Lucky13 attack. The SHA1
variants implement limited countermeasures (see f28cf8346c4) but the
SHA256 ones are apparently used rarely enough (see 8741504888b) that
it's not worth the extra code.
Instead, disable them by default and update the warning.
Updates #13385
Updates #15487
Change-Id: I45b8b716001e2fa0811b17e25be76e2512e5abb2
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/35290
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <alangley@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Brad Fitzpatrick <bradfitz@golang.org>
Run-TryBot: Matt Layher <mdlayher@gmail.com>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
This change enables the ChaCha20-Poly1305 cipher suites by default. This
changes the default ClientHello and thus requires updating all the
tests.
Change-Id: I6683a2647caaff4a11f9e932babb6f07912cad94
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/30958
Run-TryBot: Brad Fitzpatrick <bradfitz@golang.org>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Brad Fitzpatrick <bradfitz@golang.org>
Although an AEAD, in general, can be used concurrently in both the seal
and open directions, TLS is easier. Since the transport keys are
different for different directions in TLS, an AEAD will only ever be
used in one direction. Thus we don't need separate buffers for seal and
open because they can never happen concurrently.
Also, fix the nonce size to twelve bytes since the fixed-prefix
construction for AEADs is superseded and will never be used for anything
else now.
Change-Id: Ibbf6c6b1da0e639f4ee0e3604410945dc7dcbb46
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/30959
Run-TryBot: Adam Langley <agl@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Brad Fitzpatrick <bradfitz@golang.org>
This change adds support for the ChaCha20-Poly1305 AEAD to crypto/tls,
as specified in https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7905.
Fixes#15499.
Change-Id: Iaa689be90e03f208c40b574eca399e56f3c7ecf1
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/30957
Run-TryBot: Adam Langley <agl@golang.org>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Brad Fitzpatrick <bradfitz@golang.org>
The aim is to make the decrypt() timing profile constant, irrespective of
the CBC padding length or correctness. The old algorithm, on valid padding,
would only MAC bytes up to the padding length threshold, making CBC
ciphersuites vulnerable to plaintext recovery attacks as presented in the
"Lucky Thirteen" paper.
The new algorithm Write()s to the MAC all supposed payload, performs a
constant time Sum()---which required implementing a constant time Sum() in
crypto/sha1, see the "Lucky Microseconds" paper---and then Write()s the rest
of the data. This is performed whether the padding is good or not.
This should have no explicit secret-dependent timings, but it does NOT
attempt to normalize memory accesses to prevent cache timing leaks.
Updates #13385
Change-Id: I15d91dc3cc6eefc1d44f317f72ff8feb0a9888f7
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/18130
Run-TryBot: Russ Cox <rsc@golang.org>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Russ Cox <rsc@golang.org>
These were new with TLS 1.2 and, reportedly, some servers require it.
Since it's easy, this change adds suport for three flavours of
AES-128-CBC with SHA-256 MACs.
Other testdata/ files have to be updated because this changes the list
of cipher suites offered by default by the client.
Fixes#15487.
Change-Id: I1b14330c31eeda20185409a37072343552c3464f
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/27315
Run-TryBot: Adam Langley <agl@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Brad Fitzpatrick <bradfitz@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Jonathan Rudenberg <jonathan@titanous.com>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
A comment existed referencing RC4 coming before AES because of it's
vulnerability to the Lucky 13 attack. This clarifies that the Lucky 13 attack
only effects AES-CBC, and not AES-GCM.
Fixes#14474
Change-Id: Idcb07b5e0cdb0f9257cf75abea60129ba495b5f5
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/19845
Reviewed-by: Brad Fitzpatrick <bradfitz@golang.org>
Prior to TLS 1.2, the handshake had a pleasing property that one could
incrementally hash it and, from that, get the needed hashes for both
the CertificateVerify and Finished messages.
TLS 1.2 introduced negotiation for the signature and hash and it became
possible for the handshake hash to be, say, SHA-384, but for the
CertificateVerify to sign the handshake with SHA-1. The problem is that
one doesn't know in advance which hashes will be needed and thus the
handshake needs to be buffered.
Go ignored this, always kept a single handshake hash, and any signatures
over the handshake had to use that hash.
However, there are a set of servers that inspect the client's offered
signature hash functions and will abort the handshake if one of the
server's certificates is signed with a hash function outside of that
set. https://robertsspaceindustries.com/ is an example of such a server.
Clearly not a lot of thought happened when that server code was written,
but its out there and we have to deal with it.
This change decouples the handshake hash from the CertificateVerify
hash. This lays the groundwork for advertising support for SHA-384 but
doesn't actually make that change in the interests of reviewability.
Updating the advertised hash functions will cause changes in many of the
testdata/ files and some errors might get lost in the noise. This change
only needs to update four testdata/ files: one because a SHA-384-based
handshake is now being signed with SHA-256 and the others because the
TLS 1.2 CertificateRequest message now includes SHA-1.
This change also has the effect of adding support for
client-certificates in SSLv3 servers. However, SSLv3 is now disabled by
default so this should be moot.
It would be possible to avoid much of this change and just support
SHA-384 for the ServerKeyExchange as the SKX only signs over the nonces
and SKX params (a design mistake in TLS). However, that would leave Go
in the odd situation where it advertised support for SHA-384, but would
only use the handshake hash when signing client certificates. I fear
that'll just cause problems in the future.
Much of this code was written by davidben@ for the purposes of testing
BoringSSL.
Partly addresses #9757
Change-Id: I5137a472b6076812af387a5a69fc62c7373cd485
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/9415
Run-TryBot: Adam Langley <agl@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@golang.org>
Generalizes PRF calculation for TLS 1.2 to support arbitrary hashes (SHA-384 instead of SHA-256).
Testdata were all updated to correspond with the new cipher suites in the handshake.
Change-Id: I3d9fc48c19d1043899e38255a53c80dc952ee08f
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/3265
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@golang.org>
A new attack on CBC padding in SSLv3 was released yesterday[1]. Go only
supports SSLv3 as a server, not as a client. An easy fix is to change
the default minimum version to TLS 1.0 but that seems a little much
this late in the 1.4 process as it may break some things.
Thus this patch adds server support for TLS_FALLBACK_SCSV[2] -- a
mechanism for solving the fallback problem overall. Chrome has
implemented this since February and Google has urged others to do so in
light of yesterday's news.
With this change, clients can indicate that they are doing a fallback
connection and Go servers will be able to correctly reject them.
[1] http://googleonlinesecurity.blogspot.com/2014/10/this-poodle-bites-exploiting-ssl-30.html
[2] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-tls-downgrade-scsv-00
LGTM=rsc
R=rsc
CC=golang-codereviews
https://golang.org/cl/157090043
