Re: [openssl-users] Weird not-so-self-signed certificate

2012-08-06 Thread Erwann Abalea 

Bonjour,

The given certificate is correctly self-signed, you can manually check 
it by extracting the signature block and playing with openssl rsautl 
..., dd ... | openssl dgst -sha1, etc.


It fails the validation path check probably because it's not declared as 
a CA. There's some ongoing work on IETF about DANE certificates and 
clarifications on RFC5280 about self-signed EE certificates. The 
presented certificate is certainly such a DANE one.


--
Erwann ABALEA
-
pastacircopyge: quelqu'un qui a vraiment beaucoup de chance

Le 06/08/2012 13:04, Johannes Bauer a écrit :

Hi list,

I'm quite puzzled and hope somebody can help me. I'm handling a large
number of certificates and for generating testcases for the software I
employ, I wrote a small script that downloaded web server certificates
en bulk and then processed them, to check for irregularities.

My software barfed on a certain certificate, which is this one:

-BEGIN CERTIFICATE-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-END CERTIFICATE-

It's seemingly self-signed, but then again -- not. When I call openssl:

$ openssl verify -CApath /dev/null -CAfile weird.crt weird.crt
weird.crt: /CN=WMSvc-WIN-EEBHLC81GJ8
error 20 at 0 depth lookup:unable to get local issuer certificate

Interestingly the lookup fails at depth 0 (!). If a parent certificate
were missing, I'd expect a lookup fail at depth 1.

When I create a self-signed certificate:

$ openssl req -new -x509 -nodes -out foobar.crt

And check it then:

$ openssl verify -CApath /dev/null -CAfile foobar.crt foobar.crt
foobar.crt: OK

I'm puzzled and before jumping to conclusions wanted to ask you first
what you think of that.

Best regards,
Johannes
__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing Listopenssl-users@openssl.org
Automated List Manager   majord...@openssl.org



__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing Listopenssl-users@openssl.org
Automated List Manager   majord...@openssl.org

RE: [openssl-users] Weird not-so-self-signed certificate

2012-08-06 Thread Dave Thompson 
 From: owner-openssl-us...@openssl.org On Behalf Of Erwann Abalea
 Sent: Monday, 06 August, 2012 08:06

 The given certificate is correctly self-signed, you can 
 manually check 
 it by extracting the signature block and playing with openssl rsautl 
 ..., dd ... | openssl dgst -sha1, etc.
 
 It fails the validation path check probably because it's not 
 declared as 
 a CA. There's some ongoing work on IETF about DANE certificates and 
 clarifications on RFC5280 about self-signed EE certificates. The 
 presented certificate is certainly such a DANE one.
 
Specifically, as I responded Friday to a post from Harald Latzko 
RE: TLS server/client with self-signed certificate : 
OpenSSL won't verify a self-signed cert *or* a real CA cert 
if it has KeyUsage that excludes certSign, as this one does. 

It's not clear to me whether a self-signed cert used only for 
an entity, not to issue other certs, *should* have BC.CA:true, 
but current OpenSSL definitely doesn't require it. (I've 
tested BC.CA:false KU:includes.certSign and OpenSSL works.)

 Le 06/08/2012 13:04, Johannes Bauer a écrit :

  -BEGIN CERTIFICATE-
  MIIC8TCCAdmgAwIBAgIQNmL4pIUXFpRBUK7QhJR/JjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQUFADAg
  MR4wHAYDVQQDExVXTVN2Yy1XSU4tRUVCSExDODFHSjgwHhcNMTAxMjIzMjAzOTU0
  WhcNMjAxMjIwMjAzOTU0WjAgMR4wHAYDVQQDExVXTVN2Yy1XSU4tRUVCSExDODFH
  SjgwggEiMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUAA4IBDwAwggEKAoIBAQD6CNzdS+lWquEQndmY
  R1XY6cEqeMSB6YVSxXFAARRsdLQceCIpZbD5CijYklx874gOokTwSzZ7EJ6QSPUL
  jItM5PRlkeh0twrVEU5UTeqybAnVEciL5oVy6EPm4niYweAJrf5QCtPcORtt2Kjs
  xYAX2Ltl7mjvi+QM+XwDX0LKWyIjpYTZXB/5XRnpzUuBw3pDx+z4fWk8SFqN4Ptb
  /7fZSoxI6VeuTvrgS4aMyjsPylPnpXVAFYOcxketS0D1F9m0z5t3eD3hXesgbCHS
  svy0gACF3qvarJiE6MVDaJ/tlX408G9V3gEHpCCrk+yL5FiT/dtr7tNlWMt+o9D4
  5/kNAgMBAAGjJzAlMBMGA1UdJQQMMAoGCCsGAQUFBwMBMA4GA1UdDwQHAwUAsAAA
  ADANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQUFAAOCAQEAYvuUspk2lHiP3IM4maY2DOH0UfSsldyqOICP
  ue3xmqNnkhN7QBe8GIcsKt3fiozC7L+zcxdIY6L7WgGx1+aK8f3AKl/FojPegMhC
  WsgNy5WsR+jLUduclZDGf4qXxo9Vs1qXeP4qYZOa1rtqiBfFaQsxs4+XyFHdaB8N
  HzviKd8NSeCn+ZfUTKYlErUAL+qtLaQQTqVvBVnwR9yT74izZ48f0mX8zHYMFJIk
  mokioFqzl2ZVF98JBLSy6sNTZfO+eg98g3uDVRwq9JyvsWp1OJ94BvoXFZX7ETDM
  Z53Hp5s3YUNRptlIvzre/foKg4MZB8BNUsEUdgaGOeoXho7jDA==
  -END CERTIFICATE-
 
  It's seemingly self-signed, but then again -- not. When I 
 call openssl:
 
  $ openssl verify -CApath /dev/null -CAfile weird.crt weird.crt
  weird.crt: /CN=WMSvc-WIN-EEBHLC81GJ8
  error 20 at 0 depth lookup:unable to get local issuer certificate
 
  Interestingly the lookup fails at depth 0 (!). If a parent 
 certificate
  were missing, I'd expect a lookup fail at depth 1.
 
It's lookup of the issuer of the cert at 0 that failed. Because 
the lookup failed (after being attempted by mistake), to OpenSSL 
there is NO cert at depth 1 in this chain, only a hole.

  When I create a self-signed certificate:
 
  $ openssl req -new -x509 -nodes -out foobar.crt
 
  And check it then: [OK]

By default req -new -x509 does no extensions. Use a config 
file and x509_extensions or -extensions section that includes 
KeyUsage as above and you can recreate the problem.


__
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing Listopenssl-users@openssl.org
Automated List Manager   majord...@openssl.org