Not possible to disable new TLS extensions for TLS 1.2 connections

Amir Khassaia amir.khassaia at gmail.com
Wed Feb 13 22:08:22 UTC 2019


Hi Thomas,
Can you confirm its tied to new extensions to TLS 1.2 client hello and
whether you diagnosed which one was the problem in Lotus Notes case ?

On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 9:05 AM Thomas Lußnig <openjdk at suche.org> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> maybe two points.
>
> 1) Older lotus notes server have the problem.
> 2) The problem can be solved if you disable TLSv1.3 or even TLSv1.2
> 3) Maybe it would be an good idea to build an set of client hello's with
> different options.
>       Or even an generator. Than you send if and check the result since
> the servers with problem
>       only reply with an ssl alert. So you can check it without an ssl
> engine or jdk build
>
>
> Gruß Thomas
>
> Am 13.02.2019 um 22:44:31 schrieb Xuelei Fan:
> > Hi Amir,
> >
> > Could you build OpenJDK by yourself?  If it is doable, I could send
> > your a patch to disable the extension so that you can confirm if and
> > which extension is the underlying problem.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Xuelei
> >
> >
> > On 2/13/2019 1:16 PM, Amir Khassaia wrote:
> >> Hi Xuelei,
> >> There were 2 distinct cases of change of behaviour.
> >>
> >>   * The "CN=invalid2.invalid, OU="No SNI provided" reliably works
> >>     without SNI in Java 8 but is indeed fixed by having an SNI included
> >>     which perhaps was needed all along. This one is reported by XMPP/TLS
> >>     connection from talk.google.com:5222 <http://talk.google.com:5222>
> >>   * The aborted handshake case (client_hello traces that I've provided)
> >>     this happened with a hardware device which was replicable with an
> >>     SSL socket handshake program that I referenced in the gist.
> >>     Unfortunately replication requires a specific device model so it
> >>     wont be possible to see it for yourself. The workaround there was to
> >>     either downgrade JRE to < 11 or to switch JRE globally to use TLS
> >>     1.0 or TLS 1.1 via the system property. This is where your proposed
> >>     enhancement will be of great help as it will allow a per connection
> >>     type decision.
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 3:01 PM Xuelei Fan <xuelei.fan at oracle.com
> >> <mailto:xuelei.fan at oracle.com>> wrote:
> >>
> >>     Hi Amir,
> >>
> >>     It should be rare now the a TLS vendor cannot ignore unknown
> >> extensions.
> >>
> >>       > "issuer": "CN=invalid2.invalid, OU="No SNI provided;
> >>       > please fix your client."",
> >>     The error message encapsulated in the certificate does not sound
> >> right
> >>     to me.  Is it caused by the absence of SNI extension?
> >>
> >>     Did you have a test case that I can reproduce the problem?
> >>
> >>     Thanks & Regards,
> >>     Xuelei
> >>
> >>
> >>     On 1/7/2019 9:27 PM, Amir Khassaia wrote:
> >>      > Xuelei,
> >>      > The certificate in the connection is a red herring and not
> >>     important.
> >>      > It's actually a very unusual behaviour by talk.google.com
> >>     <http://talk.google.com>
> >>      > <http://talk.google.com> endpoint to encapsulate an error
> message
> >>     inside
> >>      > a certificate.
> >>      >
> >>      > As per the output I included:
> >>      >
> >>      > /"certificate" : { />/    "version"            : "v3", />/
> >>     "serial number"      : "00 90 76 89 18 E9 33 93 A0", />/
> >> "signature algorithm": "SHA256withRSA", />/    "issuer"
> >>       : "CN=invalid2.invalid, OU="No SNI provided; />/please fix your
> >>     client."", />/    "not before"         : "2015-01-01 11:00:00.000
> >>     AEDT", />/    "not  after"         : "2030-01-01 11:00:00.000 AEDT",
> >>     />/    "subject"            : "CN=invalid2.invalid, OU="No SNI
> >>     provided; />/please fix your client."",/
> >>      >
> >>      > /
> >>      > /
> >>      >
> >>      > This certificate simply masks the TLS interoperability issue
> >> as an
> >>      > untrusted certificate issue.
> >>      >
> >>      > The fact is, some of the extensions sent by JSSE are changes to
> >>     TLS 1.2
> >>      > to support TLS 1.3, this however affects some clients
> >> adversely in
> >>      > practice and usually JDK provides properties to turn new
> >>     enhancements
> >>      > off and work around such behaviour, for the extensions I
> >>     mentioned this
> >>      > is not provided and hence they are always sent for client sockets
> >>     unless
> >>      > TLSv1.2 is not in use.
> >>      >
> >>      > The impact to us is that upgrading to JDK11 means for some
> >>     endpoints or
> >>      > devices that are not 100% compliant to the spec the security is
> >>     reduced
> >>      > as we have to now work around to drop connections to these to
> >>     TLSv1.1 or
> >>      > TLS1.0 or not to move to Java 11 at all.
> >>      >
> >>      > My request is simply to have all of the new extensions
> >>     configurable on
> >>      > individual basis so that they can be turned off if needed for
> >>      > compatibility just like most other security enhancements that
> >> were
> >>      > delivered in the past.
> >>      >
> >>      > It appears some of the issues can come from
> >>      >
> >>      > - inclusion of RSASSA-PSS alg in TLS 1.2 handshakes but these can
> >>      > disabled at least
> >>      >
> >>      > -signature_algorithms_cert and supported_versions extensions
> >>     which seem
> >>      > to be hardcoded for TLS 1.2 (I was not able to conclusively
> >> identify
> >>      > which of these caused my troubles)
> >>      >
> >>      > https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8446#section-1.3 does say that
> TLS
> >>     1.2
> >>      > clients are affected but in an optional manner.Just today I've
> >>      > encountered another Java 11 interop issue with TLS but this time
> >>     with a
> >>      > physical device which can have a long shelf life yet running a
> >>     simple
> >>      > client socket handshake abruptly terminates the connection upon
> >>     client
> >>      > hello (no server_hello at all), and downgrading the JRE below 11
> >>     works
> >>      > fine. I'm including a trace for that as well:
> >>      >
> >>      >
> >>      > javax.net.ssl|DEBUG|01|main|2019-01-0813:40:14.395
> >> AEDT|SSLCipher.java:437|jdk.tls.keyLimits:   entry =
> >>     AES/GCM/NoPadding KeyUpdate2^37. AES/GCM/NOPADDING:KEYUPDATE
> >>     =137438953472
> >>      >
> >>      > javax.net.ssl|WARNING|01|main|2019-01-08 13:40:14.433
> >>      > AEDT|ServerNameExtension.java:255|Unable to indicate server name
> >>      >
> >>      > javax.net.ssl|DEBUG|01|main|2019-01-08 13:40:14.433
> >>      > AEDT|SSLExtensions.java:235|Ignore, context unavailable
> >> extension:
> >>      > server_name
> >>      >
> >>      > javax.net.ssl|DEBUG|01|main|2019-01-08 13:40:14.433
> >>      > AEDT|SSLExtensions.java:235|Ignore, context unavailable
> >> extension:
> >>      > status_request
> >>      >
> >>      > javax.net.ssl|WARNING|01|main|2019-01-08 13:40:14.443
> >>      > AEDT|SignatureScheme.java:282|Signature algorithm, ed25519, is
> >> not
> >>      > supported by the underlying providers
> >>      >
> >>      > javax.net.ssl|WARNING|01|main|2019-01-08 13:40:14.444
> >>      > AEDT|SignatureScheme.java:282|Signature algorithm, ed448, is not
> >>      > supported by the underlying providers
> >>      >
> >>      > javax.net.ssl|INFO|01|main|2019-01-08 13:40:14.449
> >>      > AEDT|AlpnExtension.java:161|No available application protocols
> >>      >
> >>      > javax.net.ssl|DEBUG|01|main|2019-01-08 13:40:14.449
> >>      > AEDT|SSLExtensions.java:235|Ignore, context unavailable
> >> extension:
> >>      > application_layer_protocol_negotiation
> >>      >
> >>      > javax.net.ssl|DEBUG|01|main|2019-01-08 13:40:14.450
> >>      > AEDT|SSLExtensions.java:235|Ignore, context unavailable
> >> extension:
> >>      > status_request_v2
> >>      >
> >>      > javax.net.ssl|DEBUG|01|main|2019-01-08 13:40:14.453
> >>      > AEDT|ClientHello.java:651|Produced ClientHello handshake
> >> message (
> >>      >
> >>      > "ClientHello": {
> >>      >
> >>      > "client version"      : "TLSv1.2",
> >>      >
> >>      > "random"              : "1A BA E8 FC 59 00 AB DF 9A 1A 07 94 24
> >>     7F 34 3D
> >>      > 0B D2 7D 10 72 52 54 CD 44 43 62 E8 8B 42 C6 68",
> >>      >
> >>      > "session id"          : "",
> >>      >
> >>      > "cipher suites"       :
> >>      > "[TLS_ECDHE_ECDSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256(0xC023),
> >>      > TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256(0xC027),
> >>      > TLS_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256(0x003C),
> >>      > TLS_ECDH_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256(0xC029),
> >>      > TLS_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA(0x002F)]",
> >>      >
> >>      > "compression methods" : "00",
> >>      >
> >>      > "extensions"          : [
> >>      >
> >>      > "supported_groups (10)": {
> >>      >
> >>      > "versions": [secp256r1, secp384r1, secp521r1, secp160k1]
> >>      >
> >>      >      },
> >>      >
> >>      > "ec_point_formats (11)": {
> >>      >
> >>      > "formats": [uncompressed]
> >>      >
> >>      >      },
> >>      >
> >>      > "signature_algorithms (13)": {
> >>      >
> >>      > "signature schemes": [ecdsa_secp256r1_sha256,
> >>     ecdsa_secp384r1_sha384,
> >>      > ecdsa_secp512r1_sha512, rsa_pss_rsae_sha256, rsa_pss_rsae_sha384,
> >>      > rsa_pss_rsae_sha512, rsa_pss_pss_sha256, rsa_pss_pss_sha384,
> >>      > rsa_pss_pss_sha512, rsa_pkcs1_sha256, rsa_pkcs1_sha384,
> >>      > rsa_pkcs1_sha512, dsa_sha256, ecdsa_sha224, rsa_sha224,
> >> dsa_sha224,
> >>      > ecdsa_sha1, rsa_pkcs1_sha1, dsa_sha1, rsa_md5]
> >>      >
> >>      >      },
> >>      >
> >>      > "signature_algorithms_cert (50)": {
> >>      >
> >>      > "signature schemes": [ecdsa_secp256r1_sha256,
> >>     ecdsa_secp384r1_sha384,
> >>      > ecdsa_secp512r1_sha512, rsa_pss_rsae_sha256, rsa_pss_rsae_sha384,
> >>      > rsa_pss_rsae_sha512, rsa_pss_pss_sha256, rsa_pss_pss_sha384,
> >>      > rsa_pss_pss_sha512, rsa_pkcs1_sha256, rsa_pkcs1_sha384,
> >>      > rsa_pkcs1_sha512, dsa_sha256, ecdsa_sha224, rsa_sha224,
> >> dsa_sha224,
> >>      > ecdsa_sha1, rsa_pkcs1_sha1, dsa_sha1, rsa_md5]
> >>      >
> >>      >      },
> >>      >
> >>      > "extended_master_secret (23)": {
> >>      >
> >>      >        <empty>
> >>      >
> >>      >      },
> >>      >
> >>      > "supported_versions (43)": {
> >>      >
> >>      > "versions": [TLSv1.2, TLSv1.1]
> >>      >
> >>      >      },
> >>      >
> >>      > "renegotiation_info (65,281)": {
> >>      >
> >>      > "renegotiated connection": [<no renegotiated connection>]
> >>      >
> >>      >      }
> >>      >
> >>      >    ]
> >>      >
> >>      > }
> >>      >
> >>      > )
> >>      >
> >>      > javax.net.ssl|DEBUG|01|main|2019-01-08 13:40:14.455
> >>      > AEDT|Alert.java:232|Received alert message (
> >>      >
> >>      > "Alert": {
> >>      >
> >>      > "level"      : "fatal",
> >>      >
> >>      > "description": "handshake_failure"
> >>      >
> >>      > }
> >>      >
> >>      > )
> >>      >
> >>      > javax.net.ssl|ERROR|01|main|2019-01-08 13:40:14.456
> >>      > AEDT|TransportContext.java:313|Fatal (HANDSHAKE_FAILURE):
> >>     Received fatal
> >>      > alert: handshake_failure (
> >>      >
> >>      > "throwable" : {
> >>      >
> >>      >    javax.net.ssl.SSLHandshakeException: Received fatal alert:
> >>      > handshake_failure
> >>      >
> >>      >      at
> >> java.base/sun.security.ssl.Alert.createSSLException(Alert.java:128)
> >>      >
> >>      >      at
> >> java.base/sun.security.ssl.Alert.createSSLException(Alert.java:117)
> >>      >
> >>      >      at
> >>      >
> >>
> java.base/sun.security.ssl.TransportContext.fatal(TransportContext.java:308)
> >>      >
> >>      >      at
> >>      >
> >> java.base/sun.security.ssl.Alert$AlertConsumer.consume(Alert.java:279)
> >>      >
> >>      >      at
> >>      >
> >>
> java.base/sun.security.ssl.TransportContext.dispatch(TransportContext.java:181)
> >>      >
> >>      >      at
> >>      >
> >> java.base/sun.security.ssl.SSLTransport.decode(SSLTransport.java:164)
> >>      >
> >>      >      at
> >>      >
> >> java.base/sun.security.ssl.SSLSocketImpl.decode(SSLSocketImpl.java:1152)
> >>      >
> >>      >      at
> >>      >
> >>
> java.base/sun.security.ssl.SSLSocketImpl.readHandshakeRecord(SSLSocketImpl.java:1063)
> >>      >
> >>      >      at
> >>      >
> >>
> java.base/sun.security.ssl.SSLSocketImpl.startHandshake(SSLSocketImpl.java:402)
> >>      >
> >>      >      at SslSocketClient.main(SslSocketClient.kt:47)}
> >>      >
> >>      >
> >>      > )
> >>      >
> >>      > javax.net.ssl|DEBUG|01|main|2019-01-08 13:40:14.457
> >>      > AEDT|SSLSocketImpl.java:1361|close the underlying socket
> >>      >
> >>      > javax.net.ssl|DEBUG|01|main|2019-01-08 13:40:14.457
> >>      > AEDT|SSLSocketImpl.java:1380|close the SSL connection
> >> (initiative)
> >>      >
> >>      > Exception in thread "main" javax.net.ssl.SSLHandshakeException:
> >>     Received
> >>      > fatal alert: handshake_failure
> >>      >
> >>      >    at
> >> java.base/sun.security.ssl.Alert.createSSLException(Alert.java:128)
> >>      >
> >>      >    at
> >> java.base/sun.security.ssl.Alert.createSSLException(Alert.java:117)
> >>      >
> >>      >    at
> >>      >
> >>
> java.base/sun.security.ssl.TransportContext.fatal(TransportContext.java:308)
> >>      >
> >>      >    at
> >> java.base/sun.security.ssl.Alert$AlertConsumer.consume(Alert.java:279)
> >>      >
> >>      >    at
> >>      >
> >>
> java.base/sun.security.ssl.TransportContext.dispatch(TransportContext.java:181)
> >>      >
> >>      >    at
> >> java.base/sun.security.ssl.SSLTransport.decode(SSLTransport.java:164)
> >>      >
> >>      >    at
> >>      >
> >> java.base/sun.security.ssl.SSLSocketImpl.decode(SSLSocketImpl.java:1152)
> >>      >
> >>      >    at
> >>      >
> >>
> java.base/sun.security.ssl.SSLSocketImpl.readHandshakeRecord(SSLSocketImpl.java:1063)
> >>      >
> >>      >    at
> >>      >
> >>
> java.base/sun.security.ssl.SSLSocketImpl.startHandshake(SSLSocketImpl.java:402)
> >>      >
> >>      >    at SslSocketClient.main(SslSocketClient.kt:47)
> >>      >
> >>      >
> >>      >
> >>      >
> >>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/attachments/20190214/1a808acd/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the security-dev mailing list