Bug 637433
Summary: | Accepting bad SSL certificate applies to any expected hostname | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 | Reporter: | Matt McCutchen <matt> |
Component: | evolution-data-server | Assignee: | Matthew Barnes <mbarnes> |
Status: | CLOSED WONTFIX | QA Contact: | Desktop QE <desktop-qa-list> |
Severity: | low | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | low | ||
Version: | 6.0 | CC: | mbarnes, mcrha, rcvalle, tpelka, vdanen |
Target Milestone: | rc | ||
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2013-06-11 13:06:07 UTC | Type: | --- |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: | |||
Bug Depends On: | |||
Bug Blocks: | 818922 |
Description
Matt McCutchen
2010-09-25 19:48:21 UTC
This bug is like CVE-2008-2809 in Mozilla applications, except the certificate is accepted for any hostname whatsoever, not just the ones listed in the certificate. A mitigating factor is that a user typically uses a few hand-picked mail servers, which are less likely to be malicious than a random web site for which he/she might be persuaded to accept a bad certificate. Thank you for the report. As a reference, the original upstream report is here: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=606181 This is indeed interesting. I can reproduce this, _until_ I restart the wizard. For instance, on the first try, I first try: - localhost:4433/SSL/IMAP --> warns of bad cert --> click OK, kill and restart test server - 127.0.0.1:4433/SSL/IMAP --> no complaint - exit evolution wizard (click cancel) - restart evolution wizard - 127.0.0.1:4433/SSL/IMAP --> warns of bad cert --> click cancel - localhost:4433/SSL/IMAP --> warns of bad cert So it looks as though this allowing all bad certs is session-dependant; it doesn't persist across sessions (perhaps with invocations of the wizard only, not sure?). Do you get the same behaviour? It seems as though accepting one bad cert won't allow you to accept bad certs forever, just in that instance. It also looks like this behaviour of warning about bad certificates is relatively new; evolution on RHEL5 does not warn about the bad cert (looks like it takes bad certs all the time), so the strange inconsistency is with newer evolution (the above was tested with F13; I've not tried earlier to see when this behaviour might have been introduced). Finally getting back to this issue... (In reply to comment #3) > I can reproduce this, _until_ I restart the wizard. For instance, on the first > try, I first try: > > - localhost:4433/SSL/IMAP --> warns of bad cert --> click OK, kill and restart > test server > - 127.0.0.1:4433/SSL/IMAP --> no complaint > - exit evolution wizard (click cancel) > - restart evolution wizard > - 127.0.0.1:4433/SSL/IMAP --> warns of bad cert --> click cancel > - localhost:4433/SSL/IMAP --> warns of bad cert > > So it looks as though this allowing all bad certs is session-dependant; it > doesn't persist across sessions (perhaps with invocations of the wizard only, > not sure?). I see the behavior you describe when I run Evolution for the first time in a user account, so that the wizard opens immediately and Evolution quits if the wizard is canceled. The non-persistence is apparently the result of the mail session not being shut down properly in this case (arguably a bug). But if I complete the wizard once so that the main Evolution UI comes up, from that point on, all cert exceptions persist even across application restarts. I cannot reproduce this with 2.28.3 of evolution and evolution-data-server, same as the current stable 3.2.2 and current git master 3.3.2, as I stated in: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=606181#c7 The main question, are you sure you run the second server, not the first? Because that's the only difference which can explain what you see. I can provide a simple test patch which will show what fingerprints are received and tested and such, to be sure we all see the same, if you wish. Matt explained me in the upstream bug what I did wrong in my steps. I continue discussion there first. This request was evaluated by Red Hat Product Management for inclusion in the current release of Red Hat Enterprise Linux. Because the affected component is not scheduled to be updated in the current release, Red Hat is unfortunately unable to address this request at this time. Red Hat invites you to ask your support representative to propose this request, if appropriate and relevant, in the next release of Red Hat Enterprise Linux. If you would like it considered as an exception in the current release, please ask your support representative. (In reply to comment #15) > Matt explained me in the upstream bug what I did wrong in my steps. I > continue discussion there first. The upstream change made it for 3.5.1+/3.5.2+. Development Management has reviewed and declined this request. You may appeal this decision by reopening this request. |