On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 09:26:25AM -0500, jack seth wrote:
> Ok I have been doing some experiments with OpenVPN and I can connect using 
> 10000 bit DH parameters.  Any bigger than that up to at least 13824 I get the 
> following 'modulus too large' error on the client log:
> 
> TLS_ERROR: BIO read tls_read_plaintext error: error:05066067:Diffie-Hellman 
> routines:COMPUTE_KEY:modulus too large: error:14098005:SSL 
> routines:SSL3_SEND_CLIENT_KEY_EXCHANGE:DH lib
> Wed Apr 22 07:08:58 2015 TLS Error: TLS object -> incoming plaintext read 
> error
> Wed Apr 22 07:08:58 2015 TLS Error: TLS handshake failed
> 
> Something interesting/weird also happened.  I tried to test 10001, 10002, and 
> 10004 bit DH to find the exact place I would get the 'modulus too large' 
> error.  But the server log reported the DH parameters being 10008 instead.  I 
> did a test at 15104 that gave the same error but then I tried two more times 
> and the client just sat at the 'initial packet point' like it does with the 
> 16384 bit parameters.  So somewhere between 13824 and 16384 it switches 
> between the error above and just sitting there 'frozen'.
> 
> Questions: 1. Can the modulus error be cured?  2. Do you think the same 
> modulus error is going on when the client appears to freeze with parameters 
> larger than 13824 or is something else going (i.e. why does it freeze instead 
> of giving the 'modulus error')?  3. Why does the server log report 10001, 
> 10002, 10004 bit DH as 10008?                                       

There is a limit of 10000:
#define OPENSSL_DH_MAX_MODULUS_BITS    10000

I suggest you do not change this.  It just gets slower without
adding security.

I have no idea why it would freeze with something larger than
13824.

I'm not sure what is logging the size, but it might be using
DH_size()*8 to log it.  I don't think their currently is an API
that returns it in bits.


Kurt

_______________________________________________
openssl-users mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users

Reply via email to