Make BoringSSL handling of "unusable" EchConfigLists configurable Currently, BoringSSL will silently ignore EchConfigsLists it considers "unusable". An EchConfigList is considered "unusable" if we are in one of the following scenarios: 1. The max TLS version supported by the client is < 1.3 2. No EchConfig provided in the EchConfigList is supported by BoringSSL. This happens when every EchConfig provided contains an unsupported/unrecognized cyphers/parameters (e.g., an unknown HPKE Key Encapsulation Mechanism). In these scenarios, instead of falling back onto GREASE ECH (if enabled), return an error to the caller. The caller can then decide to either retry with an empty EchConfigList or fail the connection. Bug: 542983348, b:450001346 Change-Id: I08d77022cf40d5e2b66ea3963c96bf4e3f6ea4f4 Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/99327 Reviewed-by: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com> Commit-Queue: Stefano Duo <stefanoduo@google.com>
BoringSSL is a fork of OpenSSL that is designed to meet Google's needs.
Although BoringSSL is an open source project, it is not intended for general use, as OpenSSL is. We don't recommend that third parties depend upon it. Doing so is likely to be frustrating because there are no guarantees of API or ABI stability.
Programs ship their own copies of BoringSSL when they use it and we update everything as needed when deciding to make API changes. This allows us to mostly avoid compromises in the name of compatibility. It works for us, but it may not work for you.
BoringSSL arose because Google used OpenSSL for many years in various ways and, over time, built up a large number of patches that were maintained while tracking upstream OpenSSL. As Google's product portfolio became more complex, more copies of OpenSSL sprung up and the effort involved in maintaining all these patches in multiple places was growing steadily.
Currently BoringSSL is the SSL library in Chrome/Chromium, Android (but it's not part of the NDK) and a number of other apps/programs.
Project links:
To file a security issue, use the Chromium process and mention in the report this is for BoringSSL. You can ignore the parts of the process that are specific to Chromium/Chrome.
There are other files in this directory which might be helpful: