[RFC PATCH] BUG/MINOR: ssl: revert empty handshake detection in OpenSSL <= 1.0.2

Commit 54832b97 ("BUILD: enable several LibreSSL hacks, including") changed empty handshake detection in OpenSSL <= 1.0.2 and LibreSSL, from accessing packet_length directly (not available in LibreSSL) to calling SSL_state() instead. However, SSL_state() appears to be fully broken in both OpenSSL

Re: [RFC PATCH] BUG/MINOR: ssl: revert empty handshake detection in OpenSSL <= 1.0.2

On Mon, Jul 01, 2019 at 10:32:29PM +0200, Lukas Tribus wrote: > Commit 54832b97 ("BUILD: enable several LibreSSL hacks, including") > changed empty handshake detection in OpenSSL <= 1.0.2 and LibreSSL, > from accessing packet_length directly (not available in LibreSSL) to > calling SSL_state() inst

Re: [RFC PATCH] BUG/MINOR: ssl: revert empty handshake detection in OpenSSL <= 1.0.2

Hello Willy, On Mon, 1 Jul 2019 at 22:34, Willy Tarreau wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 01, 2019 at 10:32:29PM +0200, Lukas Tribus wrote: > > Commit 54832b97 ("BUILD: enable several LibreSSL hacks, including") > > changed empty handshake detection in OpenSSL <= 1.0.2 and LibreSSL, > > from accessing packe

Re: [RFC PATCH] BUG/MINOR: ssl: revert empty handshake detection in OpenSSL <= 1.0.2

вт, 2 июл. 2019 г. в 01:34, Willy Tarreau : > On Mon, Jul 01, 2019 at 10:32:29PM +0200, Lukas Tribus wrote: > > Commit 54832b97 ("BUILD: enable several LibreSSL hacks, including") > > changed empty handshake detection in OpenSSL <= 1.0.2 and LibreSSL, > > from accessing packet_length directly (not

Re: [RFC PATCH] BUG/MINOR: ssl: revert empty handshake detection in OpenSSL <= 1.0.2

On Mon, Jul 01, 2019 at 10:55:41PM +0200, Lukas Tribus wrote: > Hello Willy, > > On Mon, 1 Jul 2019 at 22:34, Willy Tarreau wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jul 01, 2019 at 10:32:29PM +0200, Lukas Tribus wrote: > > > Commit 54832b97 ("BUILD: enable several LibreSSL hacks, including") > > > changed empty ha

Re: [RFC PATCH] BUG/MINOR: ssl: revert empty handshake detection in OpenSSL <= 1.0.2

Hello Ilya, On Mon, 1 Jul 2019 at 23:08, Илья Шипицин wrote: > > > > вт, 2 июл. 2019 г. в 01:34, Willy Tarreau : >> >> On Mon, Jul 01, 2019 at 10:32:29PM +0200, Lukas Tribus wrote: >> > Commit 54832b97 ("BUILD: enable several LibreSSL hacks, including") >> > changed empty handshake detection in

Re: [RFC PATCH] BUG/MINOR: ssl: revert empty handshake detection in OpenSSL <= 1.0.2

Hi, This thread reminds me that with BoringSSL empty (and abort) handshake is not set. After tests BoringSSL seems to have simpler case. I sent a patch to fix that. For OpenSSL <= 1.0.2, revert is the thing to do. For LibreSSL, include it with BoringSSL case could be ok (with my patch). With tim

Re: [RFC PATCH] BUG/MINOR: ssl: revert empty handshake detection in OpenSSL <= 1.0.2

can you provide some comment around code ? I think almost nobody can read such code чт, 4 июл. 2019 г. в 21:17, Emmanuel Hocdet : > Hi, > > This thread reminds me that with BoringSSL empty (and abort) handshake is > not set. > After tests BoringSSL seems to have simpler case. > I sent a patch to

Re: [RFC PATCH] BUG/MINOR: ssl: revert empty handshake detection in OpenSSL <= 1.0.2

> Le 4 juil. 2019 à 18:55, Илья Шипицин a écrit : > > can you provide some comment around code ? > > I think almost nobody can read such code > > чт, 4 июл. 2019 г. в 21:17, Emmanuel Hocdet >: > Hi, > > This thread reminds me that with BoringSSL empty (and abort) hands

Re: [RFC PATCH] BUG/MINOR: ssl: revert empty handshake detection in OpenSSL <= 1.0.2

hi Guys, On Fri, Jul 05, 2019 at 05:07:27PM +0200, Emmanuel Hocdet wrote: > > > Le 4 juil. 2019 à 18:55, ??? a écrit : > > > > can you provide some comment around code ? > > > > I think almost nobody can read such code > > > > ??, 4 ???. 2019 ?. ? 21:17, Emmanuel Hocdet >

Re: [RFC PATCH] BUG/MINOR: ssl: revert empty handshake detection in OpenSSL <= 1.0.2

сб, 6 июл. 2019 г. в 16:09, Willy Tarreau : > hi Guys, > > On Fri, Jul 05, 2019 at 05:07:27PM +0200, Emmanuel Hocdet wrote: > > > > > Le 4 juil. 2019 à 18:55, ??? a écrit : > > > > > > can you provide some comment around code ? > > > > > > I think almost nobody can read such code > > > >