The main purpose of the change is to
know from the status, at any point in
the handshake, if early data can be
sent or not and why.
Signed-off-by: Ronald Cron <ronald.cron@arm.com>
Add discard_early_data_record in SSL context for
the record layer to know if it has to discard
some potential early data record and how.
Signed-off-by: Ronald Cron <ronald.cron@arm.com>
Due to the scope reduction for
mbedtls_ssl_read_early_data(), on
server as early data state variable
we now only need a flag in the
handshake context indicating if
the server has accepted early data
or not.
Signed-off-by: Ronald Cron <ronald.cron@arm.com>
This reverts commit 0883b8b625.
Due to the scope reduction of mbedtls_ssl_read_early_data()
it is not necessary anymore to refine the usage
of early_data_status/state rather the opposite.
Signed-off-by: Ronald Cron <ronald.cron@arm.com>
Do not progress the handshake in the API, just
read early data if some has been detected by
a previous call to mbedtls_ssl_handshake(),
mbedtls_ssl_handshake_step(),
mbedtls_ssl_read() or mbedtls_ssl_write().
Signed-off-by: Ronald Cron <ronald.cron@arm.com>
Introduce early_data_state SSL context field to
distinguish better this internal state from
the status values defined for the
mbedtls_ssl_get_early_data_status() API.
Distinguish also between the client and
server states. Note that the client state
are going to be documented and reworked
as part of the implementation of
mbedtls_ssl_write_early_data().
Signed-off-by: Ronald Cron <ronald.cron@arm.com>
MBEDTLS_SSL_EARLY_DATA implies
MBEDTLS_SSL_PROTO_TLS1_3 thus
MBEDTLS_SSL_PROTO_TLS1_3 && MBEDTLS_SSL_EARLY_DATA
is equivalent to MBEDTLS_SSL_EARLY_DATA.
Signed-off-by: Ronald Cron <ronald.cron@arm.com>
Any timing variance dependant on the output of this function enables a
Bleichenbacher attack. It is extremely difficult to use safely.
In the Marvin attack paper
(https://people.redhat.com/~hkario/marvin/marvin-attack-paper.pdf) the
author suggests that implementations of PKCS 1.5 decryption that don't
include a countermeasure should be considered inherently dangerous.
They suggest that all libraries implement the same countermeasure, as
implementing different countermeasures across libraries enables the
Bleichenbacher attack as well.
This is extremely fragile and therefore we don't implement it. The use
of PKCS 1.5 in Mbed TLS implements the countermeasures recommended in
the TLS standard (7.4.7.1 of RFC 5246) and is not vulnerable.
Add a warning to PKCS 1.5 decryption to warn users about this.
Signed-off-by: Janos Follath <janos.follath@arm.com>
Make this a global mutex so that we don't have to init and free it.
Also rename the mutex to follow the convention
Signed-off-by: Ryan Everett <ryan.everett@arm.com>
The new name better reflects the fact that the 1st parameter
is just the EC family and not the curve.
Signed-off-by: Valerio Setti <valerio.setti@nordicsemi.no>
