If the lifetime of an issuing or sub CA is twice the lifetime of
the end entity certificates issued by it and the renewal cycle of
the issuing CAs is a little shorter than the validity of the end
entity certificates then three generations of CA certificates have
to be handled by the cert-enroll scripts.
These have been discouraged for a long time and there are now more and
more crypto libraries that have them disabled by default. However, for
some we only can detect this at runtime, in particular in FIPS mode, so
tests would fail as the plugins would still announce them. So instead
we just remove the schemes from these tests for now (at least for RSA,
removing signatures with SHA-1 completely isn't an option yet as that's
still the default with some clients).
Closesstrongswan/strongswan#2523
In particular for the first one randomization could trigger an additional
rekeying, which let the "Adding ESA ..." check fail. But even without
randomization (could be seen in the second scenario that already uses
`rand_time=0`) 4 seconds can apparently be too low some time.
When compiling with -O3 with GCC 14, we get the following warning/error:
/usr/include/x86_64-linux-gnu/bits/string_fortified.h:29:10: error: '__builtin_memcpy' offset [0, 3] is out of the bounds [0, 0] [-Werror=array-bounds=]
29 | return __builtin___memcpy_chk (__dest, __src, __len,
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
30 | __glibc_objsize0 (__dest));
| ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Which seems completely bogus as that array has a fixed size of 16 and
some weird workarounds remove the warning (e.g. adding an assignment
to `subset->netbits` before the `memcpy()`). This is also the only
place GCC complains about and we use `memcpy()` all over the place
in this file to set those addresses.
Closesstrongswan/strongswan#2509
While this does require quite a bit of memory, on initiators there are
usually fewer concurrent SAs getting created so this should be less of
an issue than on a gateway that handles lots of SAs as responder.
The speed up is about 30% on the initiator during the decapsulation,
while the key generation does take a bit more time (about 3%).
This follows FIPS 203 relatively closely but takes some ideas from the
reference implementation. In particular, how to avoid potential
side-channels via direct C division/modulo operations. However, it just
uses Barrett reduction (no Montgomery reduction) and no negative
coefficients to avoid number format conversions and keep the
implementation clearer.
This registers support for the ML_KEM_{512,768,1024} key exchange
algorithms in the `openssl` plugin when built using AWS-LC as the
libcrypto. To do this, we introduce the `openssl_kem` source files
which implement the key exchange algorithm using the Key Encapsulation
Mechanism (KEM) API. Future KEM algorithms can be implemented
generically using this interface by substituting the appropriate NIDs.
It also supports both seeded (via DRBG) and unseeded modes depending
on the user's requirements for KATs or entropy sources.
It should be noted that this does not add support for KEM algorithms
within upstream OpenSSL and is API incompatible. Future work will need
to condition out the incompatibilities as-appropriate. However, the
high-level logic should be the same for all KEMs and KEM APIs.
References strongswan/strongswan#2228Closesstrongswan/strongswan#2490
