about the reason why verification failed. I'll try to add the code to xmlsec to expose
this information to the application.
Aleksey
Moultrie, Ferrell (ISSAtlanta) wrote:
Aleksey: Next step -- I've gotten the new option to build on Win32 which doesn't have a strptime() (at least not that I can find in MSVC 6.0). So, I've written a quick and not too dirty date/time parser using sscanf() that's usable whenever strptime() isn't available. Also, I fixed the spelling of the --verification-time option. I hope that doesn't break any scripts you have somewhere. I'm attaching the changes -- they appear to work for me (tried three cases, very old date, current date, very future date). I've now got to go modify my code to grab the date/time and pass it into xmlsec. In the meantime, I've got one more question: When I run the sample app and it fails due to an invalid date, what I get is:ERROR Error: operation failed (D:\projects\thirdparty\xmlsoft-org-build-trees\xmlsec-021009\src\keyinf o.c:1196): error 31: cert verification failed : (D:\projects\thirdparty\xmlsoft-org-build-trees\xmlsec-021009\src\keys.c :518): error 17: key not found : (D:\projects\thirdparty\xmlsoft-org-build-trees\xmlsec-021009\src\xmldsi g.c:1437): error 17: key not found : (D:\projects\thirdparty\xmlsoft-org-build-trees\xmlsec-021009\src\xmldsi g.c:1175): error 2: xmlsec operation failed : xmlSecSignedInfoRead - -1 (D:\projects\thirdparty\xmlsoft-org-build-trees\xmlsec-021009\src\xmldsi g.c:733): error 2: xmlsec operation failed : xmlSecSignatureRead - -1 I see similar stuff in my application log if I just set the system timestamp into the future. The problem is that it says only: error 31: cert verification failed : Is there any way to get the reason that cert verification failed into the error stack? Thanks! Ferrell ------------------------------------------- 203,204c203 < #ifndef XMLSEC_NO_STRPTIME < " --verificaiton-time <time> the local time in \"YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM:SS\"\n" ---" --verification-time <time> the local time in \"YYYY-MM-DDHH:MM:SS\"\n" 206d204 < #endif /* XMLSEC_NO_STRPTIME */ 517,518c515 < #ifndef XMLSEC_NO_STRPTIME < } else if((strcmp(argv[pos], "--verificaiton-time") == 0) && (pos + 1 < argc)) { ---} else if((strcmp(argv[pos], "--verification-time") == 0) &&(pos + 1 < argc)) { 539d535 < #endif /* XMLSEC_NO_STRPTIME */ 1007a1004,1041/* ** ParseDateString() * * PARAMETERS: pszDateTime - pointer to date/time string * ptmOut - pointer to struct returningparsed time value* * DESCRIPTION: Parse a date-time string into a struct tm * Input: yyyy-mm-dd.hh:mm:ss (where '.'is any character)* * RETURNS: Zero (success) or -1 (format error) * */ #ifdef XMLSEC_NO_STRPTIME int ParseDateString(const char* pszDateTime, struct tm* ptmOut) { int iStatus = 0; int iCount = 0; memset(ptmOut, 0, sizeof(*ptmOut)); ptmOut->tm_isdst = -1; iCount = sscanf(pszDateTime, "%4u-%2u-%2u%*c%2u:%2u:%2u", &ptmOut->tm_year,&ptmOut->tm_mon, &ptmOut->tm_mday,&ptmOut->tm_hour,&ptmOut->tm_min, &ptmOut->tm_sec);if (iCount != 6 || ptmOut->tm_year < 1900 || ptmOut->tm_year > 2036 || ptmOut->tm_mon < 1 || ptmOut->tm_mon > 12 || ptmOut->tm_mday < 1 || ptmOut->tm_mday > 31 || ptmOut->tm_hour < 0 || ptmOut->tm_hour > 23 || ptmOut->tm_min < 0 || ptmOut->tm_min > 59 || ptmOut->tm_sec < 0 || ptmOut->tm_sec > 61) { iStatus = -1; } else { ptmOut->tm_year -= 1900; /* tm relative format year */ ptmOut->tm_mon -= 1; /* tm relative format month */ } return iStatus; } /* of ParseDateString() */ #endif /* XMLSEC_NO_STRPTIME */1022a1057,1062#else /* XMLSEC_NO_STRPTIME */ if (ParseDateString(str, &tm) < 0) { fprintf(stderr, "Error: the local system time in \"YYYY-MM-DDHH:MM:SS\" is expected isntead of \"%s\"\n", str);return(-1); } #endif /* XMLSEC_NO_STRPTIME */1025,1027d1064 < #endif /* XMLSEC_NO_STRPTIME */ < fprintf(stderr, "Error: strptime() function is not supported by your system, feature is disabled\n"); < return(-1); -----Original Message----- From: Aleksey Sanin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2002 3:53 AM To: Moultrie, Ferrell (ISSAtlanta) Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [xmlsec] Verify signature after certificate expired I understand the problem with using 0.9.7 and I am waiting for it for a very long time myself :) I've changed XMLSec library so now this "expired certs feature" is supported for both 0.9.6 and 0.9.7. Also I added a test case to my suite to test it. The code is not complicated but it's new code and I would appreciate if you will try this new feature in your environment. I would be glad to help you and fix any bugs you find. The fixed XMLSec version should be in tonight's snapshot or you can get it from GNOME CVS. Thank you in advance, Aleksey Moultrie, Ferrell (ISSAtlanta) wrote:Aleksey: I *must* have this stuff -- there's not really another way to do this without using a never-expiring cert from a private CA -- and that has it's own set of risks and hazards that are commisurate with, or greater than, the risk you point out of not expiring a signature after it's released. For a code and/or data signing application intended *only* to say that the data was valid at the time it was signed -- and should remain valid forever -- not having a signature expire is the proper/desired/required behavior. For your notes below: (1) My XML has a timestamp in a predictable format that correspond precisely to the time of signing so this isn't an issue in my case. Not a problem. (2) Yucky because this is extra work in the application which I was avoiding -- but that's still not a big problem since verification setup time isn't absolutely critical to my application. (3) I believe I understand your POV and the tradeoffs -- they just don't change how my application *must* behave. If you can either prototype the required code for 0.9.6g or give measgood a pointer as you can to what should be done and where, I'll check it out and test it with my application. I'm very appreciative of what you've done so far -- but I just can't use 0.9.7 in our general-release applications at this time. Too much testing -- too many unknowns -- too hard to explain if it turns out to have a critical security issue/bug/etc. Thanks again for whatever you can do to help me move forward. Finding out about this today is painful/inconvenient -- but much better than finding out about it next year when all our applications suddenly shut down. Hopefully QA would have found thissoon(I just turned the X509 stuff over to them) but if we'd missed it, it would have been very painful. Ferrell_______________________________________________ xmlsec mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.aleksey.com/mailman/listinfo/xmlsec
