Test that DTLS 1.2 rejects renegotiation

We do not support renegotiation in DTLS at all. This falls out of us
generically rejecting all unexpected handshake records after the
handshake, but test this more explicitly.

DTLS 1.2 renegotiation is particularly weird because they reset the
message sequence number, which actually makes message reassembly
ambiguous! One cannot *just* use the sequence number state to
distinguish between retransmit of a past message and a new message.

We currently assume fragments are renegotiation attempts by default, and
special-case Finished as a retransmit. If we were went the other way[*],
we should have a test that covers the new messages.

[*] Going the other way may be a little tidier if we want to implement
crbug.com/383016430. We also currently would break if we ever enabled
NPN or Channel ID in DTLS.

Change-Id: I9f304d0f7ea356fb67e63e22ee06d1ed0fcaa804
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/86987
Commit-Queue: Lily Chen <chlily@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Lily Chen <chlily@google.com>
Auto-Submit: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
2 files changed
tree: bbf92222d48d0ab6bdc94ea4ef5f0f3f682f8a1e
  1. .bcr/
  2. .github/
  3. bench/
  4. cmake/
  5. crypto/
  6. decrepit/
  7. docs/
  8. fuzz/
  9. gen/
  10. include/
  11. infra/
  12. pki/
  13. rust/
  14. ssl/
  15. third_party/
  16. tool/
  17. util/
  18. .bazelignore
  19. .bazelrc
  20. .bazelversion
  21. .clang-format
  22. .clang-format-ignore
  23. .gitignore
  24. API-CONVENTIONS.md
  25. AUTHORS
  26. BREAKING-CHANGES.md
  27. BUILD.bazel
  28. build.json
  29. BUILDING.md
  30. CMakeLists.txt
  31. codereview.settings
  32. CONTRIBUTING.md
  33. FUZZING.md
  34. go.mod
  35. go.sum
  36. INCORPORATING.md
  37. LICENSE
  38. MODULE.bazel
  39. MODULE.bazel.lock
  40. PORTING.md
  41. PRESUBMIT.py
  42. PrivacyInfo.xcprivacy
  43. README.md
  44. SANDBOXING.md
  45. STYLE.md
README.md

BoringSSL

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: