Major OpenSSL 1.0.1d regression from 1.0.1c

2013-02-06 Thread Brad House
It appears there is a major regression with OpenSSL 1.0.1d over 1.0.1c. I've narrowed it down to setting a custom cipher list I think as if I do not set a cipher list, the issue does not occur. I have reproduced the issue with the openssl s_server/s_client command line utility. You can see my

Re: Major OpenSSL 1.0.1d regression from 1.0.1c

2013-02-06 Thread Brad House
On 02/06/2013 12:30 PM, Brad House wrote: ...snip... I should also note that currently I am using OpenSSL 1.0.1d-fips 5 Feb 2013 On an Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-3770S CPU @ 3.10GHz running Ubuntu 12.04 64bit (so presumably I'm using AES-NI ... noticed changes to that in the changelog). I have not

Re: Major OpenSSL 1.0.1d regression from 1.0.1c

2013-02-06 Thread Dr. Stephen Henson
On Wed, Feb 06, 2013, Brad House wrote: On 02/06/2013 12:30 PM, Brad House wrote: ...snip... I should also note that currently I am using OpenSSL 1.0.1d-fips 5 Feb 2013 On an Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-3770S CPU @ 3.10GHz running Ubuntu 12.04 64bit (so presumably I'm using AES-NI ... noticed

Re: Major OpenSSL 1.0.1d regression from 1.0.1c

2013-02-06 Thread Brad House
On 02/06/2013 01:37 PM, Dr. Stephen Henson wrote: A possibility is the AESNI+SHA1 stitched code which is handled as a special case. You'd only see that with AES+SHA1 ciphersuites on AES-NI supporting processors. DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA also has the same issue. I'm thinking it may be a -SHA

Re: Major OpenSSL 1.0.1d regression from 1.0.1c

2013-02-06 Thread Dr. Stephen Henson
On Wed, Feb 06, 2013, Brad House wrote: On 02/06/2013 01:37 PM, Dr. Stephen Henson wrote: A possibility is the AESNI+SHA1 stitched code which is handled as a special case. You'd only see that with AES+SHA1 ciphersuites on AES-NI supporting processors. DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA also has the

Re: Major OpenSSL 1.0.1d regression from 1.0.1c

2013-02-06 Thread Holger Weiß
* Dr. Stephen Henson st...@openssl.org [2013-02-06 20:14]: On Wed, Feb 06, 2013, Brad House wrote: DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA also has the same issue. I'm thinking it may be a -SHA issue as the only -SHA cipher I've gotten to work so far is RC4-SHA. Note though the TLSv1.2+HIGH ciphers that

Re: Major OpenSSL 1.0.1d regression from 1.0.1c

2013-02-06 Thread Brad House
On 02/06/2013 02:14 PM, Dr. Stephen Henson wrote: On Wed, Feb 06, 2013, Brad House wrote: On 02/06/2013 01:37 PM, Dr. Stephen Henson wrote: A possibility is the AESNI+SHA1 stitched code which is handled as a special case. You'd only see that with AES+SHA1 ciphersuites on AES-NI supporting

Re: Major OpenSSL 1.0.1d regression from 1.0.1c

2013-02-06 Thread Brad House
On 02/06/2013 03:07 PM, Holger Weiß wrote: * Dr. Stephen Henson st...@openssl.org [2013-02-06 20:14]: On Wed, Feb 06, 2013, Brad House wrote: DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA also has the same issue. I'm thinking it may be a -SHA issue as the only -SHA cipher I've gotten to work so far is RC4-SHA.

Re: Major OpenSSL 1.0.1d regression from 1.0.1c

2013-02-06 Thread Brad House
On 02/06/2013 03:21 PM, Brad House wrote: On 02/06/2013 03:07 PM, Holger Weiß wrote: * Dr. Stephen Henson st...@openssl.org [2013-02-06 20:14]: On Wed, Feb 06, 2013, Brad House wrote: DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA also has the same issue. I'm thinking it may be a -SHA issue as the only -SHA cipher

Re: Major OpenSSL 1.0.1d regression from 1.0.1c

2013-02-06 Thread Roumen Petrov
Hi, FIPS enabled build fail at same line. Brad House wrote: It appears there is a major regression with OpenSSL 1.0.1d over 1.0.1c. I've narrowed it down to setting a custom cipher list I think as if I do not set a cipher list, the issue does not occur. I have reproduced the issue with the

Re: Major OpenSSL 1.0.1d regression from 1.0.1c

2013-02-06 Thread Dr. Stephen Henson
On Wed, Feb 06, 2013, Dr. Stephen Henson wrote: On Wed, Feb 06, 2013, Brad House wrote: In ssl/s3_cbc.c and the function ssl3_cbc_record_digest_supported try setting it to return 0 when NID_sha1 is passed. Have you not been able to reproduce this issue? I've seen it on more than