[Python-Dev] RFC: expose ssl internals for use by ctypes/cffi

2022-11-30 Thread christer
Hi all,

for quite some time I've been working on a Python implementation of a protocol 
called NTS which requires access to an API in OpenSSL which is not provided by 
the Python ssl module.  I added a patch for that which unfortunately for me the 
maintainer did not want to accept.  Some comments were made of a possible 
future way to give more generic access to the openssl library via ctypes/cffi 
but I have been unable to find more information about that.  I was home sick 
last week and decided to take a shot at it and have built something that I feel 
is a bit ugly but does seem to work.  I'd like to some feedback on this 
approach.  

My patches can be found on github, based on the Python 3.11 tag:

https://github.com/python/cpython/compare/3.11...wingel:cpython:main

Here's a short description of each patch on this branch:

"bpo-37952: SSL: add support for export_keying_material" is my old patch which 
adds the method I need to the ssl library just for reference. 

The other commits add the necessary infrastructure with some example code.  
These commits are not ready for submission but hopefully they show what I have 
in mind.

"Add CRYPTO_DLL_PATH and SSL_DLL_PATH to the _ssl module. "

This commit adds two constants to the "_ssl" C module with the paths to 
libcrypto and libssl respectively.  On Linux dladdr and on Windows 
GetModuleHandle/GetModuleFilename are used on a symbol in each library to find 
the path to the corresponding DLL.  I've verified that this works Debian 
Bulleye and on Windows 10 with Visual Studio 2017.  I don't own a Mac so I 
haven't been able to test this on macOS, but I believe dladdr is available on 
modern macOS so it might work out of the box.  With the paths it's possible to 
use ctypes or cffi get a handle to these libraries.

"Add API to get the address of the SSL structure" then adds an API to an 
SSLSocket which returns the address of the corresponding "SSL" C structure.  
This address can be used by ctypes/cffi.  One would probably want to expose 
SSL_CTX, SSL_SESSION and BIO too but I started with just SSL since that's what 
my code needs right now.

"Add a small test program" is a small test program that uses the infrastructure 
from the two above commits to call C functions in libssl/libcrypto using both 
ctypes and cffi.  It's a bit ugly but hopefully it's not too hard to understand.

"Example of how to extend the ssl library using ctypes" is an example of how a 
Python module that extends the SSL library using ctypes could look.  First get 
a handle to libssl using ctypes, set up ctypes with the correct API for the 
export_keying_material function, wrap it in a more Pythonic function and then 
extend SSLSocket with the new function.  A simplified version looks like this:

import ssl, ctypes
ssl_lib = ctypes.CDLL(ssl._ssl.SSL_DLL_PATH)
ssl_lib.SSL_export_keying_material.argtypes = (
ctypes.c_void_p,  # SSL pointer
ctypes.c_void_p, ctypes.c_size_t, # out pointer, out length
ctypes.c_void_p, ctypes.c_size_t, # label buffer, label length
ctypes.c_void_p, ctypes.c_size_t, # context, context length
ctypes.c_int) # use context flag
ssl_lib.SSL_export_keying_material.restype = ctypes.c_int

def SSL_export_keying_material(self, label, key_len, context = None):
c_key = ctypes.create_string_buffer(key_len)
c_label = ctypes.create_string_buffer(len(label))
c_context = ctypes.create_string_buffer(context, len(context))
if ssl_lib.SSL_export_keying_material(
   self._sslobj.get_internal_addr(),
c_key, key_len,
c_label, len(label),
c_context, len(context), 1);
return bytes(c_key)

ssl.SSLSocket.export_keying_material = SSL_export_keying_material

There's a final commit "Expose more OPENSSL_ variables" which add some more 
constants to the ssl module which expose the cflags and build information from 
OpenSSL.  This patch is not really necessary, but it might be a good idea to 
compare these constants with the corresponding constants retrieved using 
ctypes/cffi to make sure that exactly the same version of the openssl library 
is used.

Does this seem like a good idea?  As I said, I feel that it is a bit ugly, but 
it does mean that if someone wants to use some SSL_really_obscure_function in 
libcrypto or libssl they can do that without having to rebuild all of CPython 
themselves.  Or if they want to integrate with some other C library that wants 
a raw pointer to a SSL socket.  Hopefully this would reduce the burden on the 
ssl module maintainers a bit.

Anyway, if you think this is a good approach I could clean up my patches, add 
support for SSL_CTX/SSL_SESSION/BIO, document all of this and make it into a 
proper pull request.

  /Ch

[Python-Dev] Re: RFC: expose ssl internals for use by ctypes/cffi

2022-12-01 Thread Christer Weinigel
On Wed, 2022-11-30 at 14:14 -0800, Gregory P. Smith wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 30, 2022 at 12:47 PM Steve Dower 
> wrote:
> > On 11/30/2022 4:52 PM, chris...@weinigel.se wrote:
> > > Does this seem like a good idea?  As I said, I feel that it is a
> > bit ugly, but it does mean that if someone wants to use some
> > SSL_really_obscure_function in libcrypto or libssl they can do that
> > without having to rebuild all of CPython themselves.
> > 
> > Broadly, no, I don't think it's a good idea. We don't like
> > encouraging 
> > users to do things that make it hard to support them in the future.
> 
> +1 ... and in general if you want access to other OpenSSL APIs not
> already in the ssl module, getting them via non-stdlib packages on
> PyPI would be a better idea.
> 
> https://pypi.org/project/cryptography/ is very well supported.

Does not support TLS at all as far as I can see.

> https://pypi.org/project/oscrypto/ exists and is quite interesting.

Does not support ALPN nor export keying material.  It would probably be
possible to add support though.

> the old https://pypi.org/project/M2Crypto/ package still exists and
> seems to be maintained (wow).

Does not support ALPN nor export keying material.  And considering your
surprise at it still being maintained it doesn't feel like something
that one should use as a base for new code.

> More context: We don't like the ssl module in the standard library -
> it is already too tightly tied to OpenSSL: 
> https://discuss.python.org/t/our-future-with-openssl/21486
> 
> So if you want specific OpenSSL APIs that are not exposed, seeking to
> see them added to the standard library where they would then become
> features that need to be supported for a very long time, is going to
> be the most difficult approach as there'd need to be a very good
> reason to have them in the stdlib.

What I have tried to add support for the last two years is not an API
specific for OpenSSL, it is part of TLS.  It was introduced in TLSv1.2
in 2010 by RFC5705 "Keying Material Exporters for Transport Layer
Security (TLS)".  OpenSSL added support for it in 2011 and the API has
basically been unchanged since (the parameter names in the prototype in
openssl/tls1.h has changed but is functionally identical).  Support for
RFC5705 is available in GnuTLS, Microsoft Schannel, Mbed-TLS, Botan and
even good old Mozilla NSS.

So basically what you are telling me is that there is no interest in
adding support for a 12 year old part of TLS to the standard ssl
library in Python, nor any interest in adding hooks to make it possible
to extend the ssl library.  Because the latter is basically what I was
told to do when my patch to add support for RFC5705 was rejected:

https://bugs.python.org/issue43902

> Third party libraries that can
> provide what you need, or rolling your own libssl API wrappings
> however you choose to implement them, are better bets

I have not found any third party library that supports RFC5705, none of
the ones you mentioned above has support for it and are also missing
other functionality such as ALPN that is needed by RFC8915 "Network
Time Security for the Network Time Protocol" which is what I actually
want to implement.  The standard ssl library in Python is so very close
to what I need, it has support for everything else needed by RFC8951,
so I would very much prefer to use it if possible.

It just feels so silly somehow to have to have my own fork of all of
CPython or to use a completely different TLS library just to  be able
to use a functino that has been a part of TLS and OpenSSL since
basically forever. :)

  /Christer



___
Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
Message archived at 
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/J5ASRHNV7ZS22QBE2NWHGISV5RGB7W5W/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/