RHEL Engineering is moving the tracking of its product development work on RHEL 6 through RHEL 9 to Red Hat Jira (issues.redhat.com). If you're a Red Hat customer, please continue to file support cases via the Red Hat customer portal. If you're not, please head to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira and file new tickets here. Individual Bugzilla bugs in the statuses "NEW", "ASSIGNED", and "POST" are being migrated throughout September 2023. Bugs of Red Hat partners with an assigned Engineering Partner Manager (EPM) are migrated in late September as per pre-agreed dates. Bugs against components "kernel", "kernel-rt", and "kpatch" are only migrated if still in "NEW" or "ASSIGNED". If you cannot log in to RH Jira, please consult article #7032570. That failing, please send an e-mail to the RH Jira admins at rh-issues@redhat.com to troubleshoot your issue as a user management inquiry. The email creates a ServiceNow ticket with Red Hat. Individual Bugzilla bugs that are migrated will be moved to status "CLOSED", resolution "MIGRATED", and set with "MigratedToJIRA" in "Keywords". The link to the successor Jira issue will be found under "Links", have a little "two-footprint" icon next to it, and direct you to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira (issue links are of type "https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHEL-XXXX", where "X" is a digit). This same link will be available in a blue banner at the top of the page informing you that that bug has been migrated.
Bug 1686582 - Incorrect handling of fragmented KeyUpdate messages
Summary: Incorrect handling of fragmented KeyUpdate messages
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8
Classification: Red Hat
Component: gnutls
Version: 8.0
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
medium
medium
Target Milestone: rc
: 8.0
Assignee: Daiki Ueno
QA Contact: Ondrej Moriš
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2019-03-07 18:26 UTC by Hubert Kario
Modified: 2020-11-14 12:05 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

Fixed In Version: gnutls-3.6.8-1.el8
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2019-11-05 22:26:20 UTC
Type: Bug
Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)


Links
System ID Private Priority Status Summary Last Updated
Gitlab gnutls/gnutls/issues/699 0 None None None 2019-03-07 18:28:07 UTC
Red Hat Bugzilla 1673975 0 high CLOSED gnutls does not support multiple KeyUpdate messages on a connection 2021-02-22 00:41:40 UTC
Red Hat Product Errata RHSA-2019:3600 0 None None None 2019-11-05 22:26:42 UTC

Internal Links: 1673975

Description Hubert Kario 2019-03-07 18:26:52 UTC
Description of problem:
KeyUpdate messages interleaved with ApplicationData are not rejected by gnutls. 
This is a RFC 8446 section 5.1 violation:

   -  Handshake messages MUST NOT be interleaved with other record
      types.  That is, if a handshake message is split over two or more
      records, there MUST NOT be any other records between them.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
gnutls-3.6.5-2.el8.x86_64

How reproducible:
always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. run tlsfuzzer test-tls13-keyupdate.py test script against gnutls server

Actual results:
among failing tests there are
  '1/4 fragmented keyupdate msg, appdata between'
  '2/3 fragmented keyupdate msg, appdata between'
  '3/2 fragmented keyupdate msg, appdata between'
  '4/1 fragmented keyupdate msg, appdata between'

Expected results:
the above tests should not be listed as failing

Additional info:
there are also issues in handling split GET messages and multiple KeyUpdates in succession, but they are not directly related to this issue

Comment 13 errata-xmlrpc 2019-11-05 22:26:20 UTC
Since the problem described in this bug report should be
resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a
resolution of ERRATA.

For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated
files, follow the link below.

If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report.

https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2019:3600


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.