Hi Andrew, Can you provide the actual subject DNs for each certificate? RFC 5280 specifies that self-issued certificates (i.e., issuer DN == subject DN) are not considered in the pathLen calculation, so knowing whether these certificates are self-issued or not may be helpful in better diagnosing the issue.
Thanks, Corey From: openssl-users <openssl-users-boun...@openssl.org> On Behalf Of Andrew Lynch via openssl-users Sent: Friday, September 16, 2022 4:32 AM To: openssl-users@openssl.org Subject: AW: [EXTERNAL] Stricter pathlen checks in OpenSSL 1.1.1 compared to 1.0.2?. So is this a possible bug or a feature of OpenSSL 1.1.1? (using 1.1.1n right now) If I set up the content of CAfile or CApath so that E <- D <- C <- A is the only path that can be taken then the validation fails with error 25 at 3 depth lookup: path length constraint exceeded If I create the first root certificate (A) with pathlen:2 instead of pathlen:1 then validation succeeds user1_cert.pem: OK Chain: depth=0: C = DE, O = Test Org, CN = Test User (untrusted) E depth=1: C = DE, O = Test Org, CN = Test Sub-CA D depth=2: C = DE, O = Test Org, CN = Test Root 2-CA C depth=3: C = DE, O = Test Org, CN = Test Root 1-CA A So it appears to me that OpenSSL 1.1.1n is definitely taking the pathlen constraint of certificate A into account. Andrew. Von: Erwann Abalea <erwann.aba...@docusign.com <mailto:erwann.aba...@docusign.com> > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 15. September 2022 19:51 An: Andrew Lynch <andrew.ly...@atos.net <mailto:andrew.ly...@atos.net> > Cc: openssl-users@openssl.org <mailto:openssl-users@openssl.org> Betreff: Re: [EXTERNAL] Stricter pathlen checks in OpenSSL 1.1.1 compared to 1.0.2?. Assuming that all self-signed certificates are trusted (here, A and B), then providing a CAfile with D+C+B+A to validate E, the different possible paths are: - E <- D <- B: this path is valid - E <- D <- C <- A: this path is valid In the validation algorithm described in RFC5280 and X.509, the pathlenConstraints contained in the certificate of the Trust Anchor (here, A or B) is not taken into account. Therefore, the only ones that matter are the values set in C and D, and these values are coherent with both chains. On Thu, Sep 15, 2022 at 7:34 PM Andrew Lynch via openssl-users <openssl-users@openssl.org <mailto:openssl-users@openssl.org> > wrote: Hi, I would like to have my understanding of the following issue confirmed: Given a two-level CA where the different generations of Root cross-sign each other, the verification of an end-entity certificate fails with OpenSSL 1.1.1 – “path length constraint exceeded”. With OpenSSL 1.0.2 the same verify succeeds. All Root CA certificates have Basic Constraints CA:TRUE, pathlen:1. The Sub CA certificate has pathlen:0. A) Issuer: CN=Root CA, serialNumber=1 Subject: CN=Root CA, serialNumber=1 B) Issuer: CN=Root CA, serialNumber=2 Subject: CN=Root CA, serialNumber=2 C) Issuer: CN=Root CA, serialNumber=1 Subject: CN=Root CA, serialNumber=2 D) Issuer: CN=Root CA, serialNumber=2 Subject: CN=Sub CA, serialNumber=2 E) Issuer: CN=Sub CA, serialNumber=2 Subject: Some end entity With a CAfile containing D, C, B, A in that order the verify of E fails. If I remove the cross certificate C then the verify succeeds. I believe OpenSSL 1.1.1 is building a chain of depth 3 (D – C – A) and so pathlen:1 of A is violated. Without the cross certificate the chain is only depth 2 (D – B). Is my understanding of the reason for this failure correct? Why is OpenSSL 1.0.2 verifying successfully? Does it not check the path length constraint or is it actually picking the depth 2 chain instead of the depth 3? Regards, Andrew. -- Cordialement, Erwann Abalea.
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
