Bug 2102751 - mark SHA-1 verification in FIPS as non-approved, not just block with config
Summary: mark SHA-1 verification in FIPS as non-approved, not just block with config
Keywords:
Status: VERIFIED
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9
Classification: Red Hat
Component: gnutls
Version: 9.1
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
medium
unspecified
Target Milestone: rc
: ---
Assignee: Daiki Ueno
QA Contact: Alexander Sosedkin
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2022-06-30 14:40 UTC by Alexander Sosedkin
Modified: 2023-08-10 16:58 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

Fixed In Version: gnutls-3.7.6-23.el9
Doc Type: No Doc Update
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed:
Type: Bug
Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)


Links
System ID Private Priority Status Summary Last Updated
Red Hat Issue Tracker CRYPTO-7933 0 None None None 2022-07-19 14:55:03 UTC
Red Hat Issue Tracker RHELPLAN-126751 0 None None None 2022-06-30 14:57:45 UTC

Description Alexander Sosedkin 2022-06-30 14:40:52 UTC
Doesn't look like we want to certify SHA-1 verification at all, even though it's allowed for legacy usage.
SHA-1 verification is blocked with config in FIPS, but for certification we should either hard-block or indicator-disapprove.
I propose doing the latter downstream. Impact should be minimal if we block it by default anyway.

Upstream test that checks for verification being approved:
https://gitlab.com/gnutls/gnutls/-/blob/ebfe675f15bfb52d61451e96d0f73d792a2b9a9b/tests/fips-test.c#L457

Comment 1 Daiki Ueno 2022-07-01 05:20:43 UTC
(In reply to Alexander Sosedkin from comment #0)
> Doesn't look like we want to certify SHA-1 verification at all, even though
> it's allowed for legacy usage.
> SHA-1 verification is blocked with config in FIPS, but for certification we
> should either hard-block or indicator-disapprove.
> I propose doing the latter downstream. Impact should be minimal if we block
> it by default anyway.

DSA verification is also allowed for legacy use but we mark them non-approved in upstream, so I guess we could do the same for SHA-1 signature verification.


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