Tolerate DTLS alerts with an incorrect version number #5018
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
In the case of a protocol version alert being sent by a peer the record version number may not be what we are expecting. In DTLS records with an unexpected version number are silently discarded. This probably isn't appropriate for alerts, so we tolerate a mismatch in the minor version number. This resolves an issue reported on openssl-users where an OpenSSL server chose DTLS1.0 but the client was DTLS1.2 only and sent a protocol_version alert with a 1.2 record number. This was silently ignored by the server.
Member
Author
|
The travis failure showing here appears to be a travis environmental problem unrelated to this PR |
vdukhovni
approved these changes
Jan 5, 2018
levitte
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 9, 2018
In the case of a protocol version alert being sent by a peer the record version number may not be what we are expecting. In DTLS records with an unexpected version number are silently discarded. This probably isn't appropriate for alerts, so we tolerate a mismatch in the minor version number. This resolves an issue reported on openssl-users where an OpenSSL server chose DTLS1.0 but the client was DTLS1.2 only and sent a protocol_version alert with a 1.2 record number. This was silently ignored by the server. Reviewed-by: Viktor Dukhovni <viktor@openssl.org> (Merged from #5018)
levitte
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 9, 2018
In the case of a protocol version alert being sent by a peer the record version number may not be what we are expecting. In DTLS records with an unexpected version number are silently discarded. This probably isn't appropriate for alerts, so we tolerate a mismatch in the minor version number. This resolves an issue reported on openssl-users where an OpenSSL server chose DTLS1.0 but the client was DTLS1.2 only and sent a protocol_version alert with a 1.2 record number. This was silently ignored by the server. Reviewed-by: Viktor Dukhovni <viktor@openssl.org> (Merged from #5018) (cherry picked from commit 08455bc)
Member
Author
|
Pushed. Thanks. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
In the case of a protocol version alert being sent by a peer the record
version number may not be what we are expecting. In DTLS records with an
unexpected version number are silently discarded. This probably isn't
appropriate for alerts, so we tolerate a mismatch in the minor version
number.
This resolves an issue reported on openssl-users where an OpenSSL server
chose DTLS1.0 but the client was DTLS1.2 only and sent a protocol_version
alert with a 1.2 record number. This was silently ignored by the server.
This PR is for master and 1.1.0. A separate PR will address 1.0.2