public inbox for [email protected]  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed

From: Tom Lane <[email protected]>
To: Thomas Munro <[email protected]>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <[email protected]>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <[email protected]>
Cc: Jacob Champion <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: disabled SSL log_like tests
Date: Tue, 06 May 2025 21:18:11 -0400
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<CA+hUKG+fLqyweHqFSBcErueUVT0vDuSNWui-ySz3+d_APmq7dw@mail.gmail.com>
	<[email protected]>

I wrote:
> Yeah, I see that too.  But I also see three failures in 002_scram.pl,
> which presumably were there before e0f373ee.  (Tested on OpenBSD 7.6
> and 7.7.)  The buildfarm's OpenBSD animals haven't caught this
> because they don't run this test suite :-(.

I dug into this with gdb, and it seems like it's an omission in
LibreSSL's RSA-PSS support.  We're requesting a signature algorithm
with code 2054, which in their source is SIGALG_RSA_PSS_RSAE_SHA512,
and that leads them to this sigalgs[] table entry in
lib/libssl/ssl_sigalgs.c:

	{
		.value = SIGALG_RSA_PSS_RSAE_SHA512,
		.key_type = EVP_PKEY_RSA,
		.md = EVP_sha512,
		.security_level = 5,
		.flags = SIGALG_FLAG_RSA_PSS,
	},

The problem is that the private key has key_type EVP_PKEY_RSA_PSS
which is not equal to EVP_PKEY_RSA, so ssl_sigalg_pkey_ok() in the
same file rejects this entry as not compatible.  In fact, there
are *no* entries in sigalgs[] that can match a PSS private key
according to ssl_sigalg_pkey_ok().  So while perhaps
SIGALG_RSA_PSS_RSAE_SHA512 is the wrong thing for us to request,
I do not see a right thing.

Looking around a little more, there are places like
SSL_get_signature_type_nid() that do things like this:

	*nid = sigalg->key_type;
	if (sigalg->key_type == EVP_PKEY_RSA &&
	    (sigalg->flags & SIGALG_FLAG_RSA_PSS))
		*nid = EVP_PKEY_RSA_PSS;

So it seems like this might be a simple oversight in
ssl_sigalg_pkey_ok(), which doesn't make any such correction:

	if (sigalg->key_type != EVP_PKEY_id(pkey))
		return 0;

Anyone know anything about where to submit LibreSSL bugs?

			regards, tom lane

view thread (30+ messages)  latest in thread

reply

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: [email protected]
  Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
  Subject: Re: disabled SSL log_like tests
  In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox