`mbedtls_ssl_get_record_expansion()` is supposed to return the maximum
difference between the size of a protected record and the size of the
encapsulated plaintext.
It had the following two bugs:
(1) It did not consider the new ChaChaPoly ciphersuites, returning
the error code #MBEDTLS_ERR_SSL_INTERNAL_ERROR in this case.
(2) It did not correctly estimate the maximum record expansion in case
of CBC ciphersuites in (D)TLS versions 1.1 and higher, in which
case the ciphertext is prefixed by an explicit IV.
This commit fixes both bugs.
The length to the debug message could conceivably leak through the time it
takes to print it, and that length would in turn reveal whether padding was
correct or not.
The basis for the Lucky 13 family of attacks is for an attacker to be able to
distinguish between (long) valid TLS-CBC padding and invalid TLS-CBC padding.
Since our code sets padlen = 0 for invalid padding, the length of the input to
the HMAC function, and the location where we read the MAC, give information
about that.
A local attacker could gain information about that by observing via a
cache attack whether the bytes at the end of the record (at the location of
would-be padding) have been read during MAC verification (computation +
comparison).
Let's make sure they're always read.
The basis for the Lucky 13 family of attacks is for an attacker to be able to
distinguish between (long) valid TLS-CBC padding and invalid TLS-CBC padding.
Since our code sets padlen = 0 for invalid padding, the length of the input to
the HMAC function gives information about that.
Information about this length (modulo the MD/SHA block size) can be deduced
from how much MD/SHA padding (this is distinct from TLS-CBC padding) is used.
If MD/SHA padding is read from a (static) buffer, a local attacker could get
information about how much is used via a cache attack targeting that buffer.
Let's get rid of this buffer. Now the only buffer used is the internal MD/SHA
one, which is always read fully by the process() function.
Move definition of `MBEDTLS_CIPHER_MODE_STREAM` to header file
(`mbedtls_cipher_internal.h`), because it is used by more than
one file. Raised by TrinityTonic in #1719
The TLS layer is checking for mode, such as GCM, CCM, CBC, STREAM. ChachaPoly
needs to have its own mode, even if it's used just one cipher, in order to
allow consistent handling of mode in the TLS layer.
* development: (182 commits)
Change the library version to 2.11.0
Fix version in ChangeLog for fix for #552
Add ChangeLog entry for clang version fix. Issue #1072
Compilation warning fixes on 32b platfrom with IAR
Revert "Turn on MBEDTLS_SSL_ASYNC_PRIVATE by default"
Fix for missing len var when XTS config'd and CTR not
ssl_server2: handle mbedtls_x509_dn_gets failure
Fix harmless use of uninitialized memory in ssl_parse_encrypted_pms
SSL async tests: add a few test cases for error in decrypt
Fix memory leak in ssl_server2 with SNI + async callback
SNI + SSL async callback: make all keys async
ssl_async_resume: free the operation context on error
ssl_server2: get op_name from context in ssl_async_resume as well
Clarify "as directed here" in SSL async callback documentation
SSL async callbacks documentation: clarify resource cleanup
Async callback: use mbedtls_pk_check_pair to compare keys
Rename mbedtls_ssl_async_{get,set}_data for clarity
Fix copypasta in the async callback documentation
SSL async callback: cert is not always from mbedtls_ssl_conf_own_cert
ssl_async_set_key: detect if ctx->slots overflows
...
For the situation where the mbedTLS device has limited RAM, but the
other end of the connection doesn't support the max_fragment_length
extension. To be spec-compliant, mbedTLS has to keep a 16384 byte
incoming buffer. However the outgoing buffer can be made smaller without
breaking spec compliance, and we save some RAM.
See comments in include/mbedtls/config.h for some more details.
(The lower limit of outgoing buffer size is the buffer size used during
handshake/cert negotiation. As the handshake is half-duplex it might
even be possible to store this data in the "incoming" buffer during the
handshake, which would save even more RAM - but it would also be a lot
hackier and error-prone. I didn't really explore this possibility, but
thought I'd mention it here in case someone sees this later on a mission
to jam mbedTLS into an even tinier RAM footprint.)
