| commit | a9bdeed0cbf79003c6edcff7634f5f0cea183c9f | [log] [tgz] |
|---|---|---|
| author | David Benjamin <davidben@google.com> | Sun Jan 05 11:38:23 2025 -0500 |
| committer | Boringssl LUCI CQ <boringssl-scoped@luci-project-accounts.iam.gserviceaccount.com> | Wed Jan 08 09:27:13 2025 -0800 |
| tree | 53bf85b4a3ddd3bf3358389151b0b81ac9f48f78 | |
| parent | d3f61eeacbf7fda857c1d8bbba56e3b5cb6cc2df [diff] |
Add something to the error queue when Proc-Type version is wrong The Proc-Type header starts with a version number. From RFC 1421, Section 4.6.1.1: > The "Proc-Type:" field has two subfields, separated by a comma. The > first subfield is a decimal number which is used to distinguish among > incompatible encapsulated header field interpretations which may > arise as changes are made to this standard. Messages processed > according to this RFC will carry the subfield value "4" to > distinguish them from messages processed in accordance with prior PEM > RFCs. RFC 1421 was an update of RFC 1113, which used X-Proc-Type: 3,ENCRYPTED, which we do not support. RFC 1040 defined X-Proc-Type: 2 and RFC 989 defined X-Proc-Type: 1,E. As far as I can tell, no other numbers for Proc-Type have ever existed, and likely never will. If we were to ever Proc-Type: 5, we currently return failure but forget to put something on the error queue. It's possible this was originally done for extensibility, but it just breaks internal invariants. By returning zero, the callers will treat this as an error anyway. We'll just confuse code that expects OpenSSL to return an error. Also OpenSSL's PEM APIs all treat failure to decrypt (e.g. due to unsupported future cipher) as an error, so we should treat an unsupported future PEM encryption scheme as an error too. Change-Id: Ia1f4f6776fea8d8a465a73105bf3ce24a587f26b Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/c/boringssl/+/74809 Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com> Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@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: