Re: disabled SSL log_like tests
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: disabled SSL log_like tests |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 76775.1746653231@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: disabled SSL log_like tests (Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com> writes: > Oh, interesting. I also wondered if the problem I reported might be > related to the separate legacy code paths in x509_vfy.c. I poked at this a little more, and apparently the code to look at is actually in the sibling file x509_verify.c. Here's the backtrace (in OpenBSD 7.7) from where we construct the incorrect report: #0 verify_cb (ok=0, ctx=0x17d83e77c00) at be-secure-openssl.c:1213 #1 0x0000017ce17483dc in x509_verify (ctx=0x17d1886f700, leaf=0x17d188882a0, name=0x0) at /usr/src/lib/libcrypto/x509/x509_verify.c:1271 #2 0x0000017ce16ed683 in _lcry_X509_verify_cert (ctx=0x17d83e77c00) at /usr/src/lib/libcrypto/x509/x509_vfy.c:645 #3 0x0000017d44ebc4e3 in ssl_verify_cert_chain (s=0x17d83e96500, certs=0x17d83e5fce0) at /usr/src/lib/libssl/ssl_cert.c:437 #4 0x0000017d44eb3d13 in tls13_client_certificate_recv (ctx=0x17d18881f00, cbs=<optimized out>) at /usr/src/lib/libssl/tls13_server.c:918 #5 0x0000017d44ee8d66 in tls13_handshake_recv_action (ctx=0x17d18881f00, action=0x17d44ef6dd0 <state_machine+352>) at /usr/src/lib/libssl/tls13_handshake.c:549 #6 tls13_handshake_perform (ctx=0x17d18881f00) at /usr/src/lib/libssl/tls13_handshake.c:412 #7 0x0000017d44eb18c7 in tls13_legacy_accept (ssl=0x17d83e96500) at /usr/src/lib/libssl/tls13_legacy.c:434 #8 0x0000017a8bbd6f3a in be_tls_open_server (port=0x17d6d91f9b0) at be-secure-openssl.c:494 #9 0x0000017a8bbc41c8 in secure_open_server (port=0x17d6d91f9b0) at be-secure.c:136 #10 0x0000017a8be9d79e in ProcessStartupPacket (port=0x17d6d91f9b0, ssl_done=false, gss_done=false) at backend_startup.c:614 The code in x509_verify() is about as convoluted as can be: it seems to be dealing with two different verify-callback APIs (and naturally, the one we are using is the legacy one). There is some stuff there that saves and restores an error condition, but fails to save/restore current_cert, so the first thing I thought was that that was the problem --- but it's not, the current_cert doesn't change anyway between the save and the restore. So I failed to identify exactly where the problem is, but I wonder if it'd behave better if we switched to their new-style callback API. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: