Morning,
First of all, I hope you are all healthy during this difficult time.
I am working with Simplicity Studio IDE and with Mbed TLS and I am currently working on a project with a BGM13P32. I plan to write in a file some parameters that will allow a key exchange by bluetooth (Diffie Hellman Protocol). I intend to make the BGM13P32 read this file, and these data to allow a key exchange. Is it possible to do that? If yes, how?
Because I'm a total beginner
Thank you, and take care of yourself !
Hi all,
I have configured the max fragment length at the client and server to both 512. With this setting when I try to reconnect using a saved session at the client side, the ssl handshake doesn’t seem to happen.
Below is the comment in the server code.
/* We don't support fragmentation of ClientHello (yet?) */
The mbedtls code I am using is version 2.16.6. Are there any plans to support fragmentation of clienthello? Do let me know
Regards,
Fariya
Hi,
I do not quite have enough knowledge on DTLS session resumption .. nevertheless here's my question:
a) Difference between the features: MBEDTLS_SSL_COOKIE_C and MBEDTLS_SSL_SESSION_TICKETS?
b) Enabling the feature MBEDTLS_SSL_SESSION_TICKETS would be sufficient to resume an earlier established DTLS session quickly (i.e avoid the whole TLS handshake done the last time)?
c) How do I test this - i.e initiate connection from client and server, break the connection and then make the client connect to the server again? Not sure what additional steps are required on client side. Any callbacks to be registered in the code?
Regards,
Fariya
Hi Gilles,
I checked one you recommended and looks like it is very complicated.
Do you have any sample project(SSH client) based on MbedTLS+LWIP?
Thanks,
Christie
-----Original Message-----
From: mbed-tls <mbed-tls-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of mbed-tls-request(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Sent: July-22-20 11:35 AM
To: mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Subject: mbed-tls Digest, Vol 5, Issue 15
Send mbed-tls mailing list submissions to
mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/mbed-tls
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
mbed-tls-request(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
mbed-tls-owner(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of mbed-tls digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Problem with decrypt aes 128 in ecb mode. HELP ME!
(dany_banik2000(a)yahoo.com)
2. Re: SSH client sample (Gilles Peskine)
3. Re: patches for low memory (Gilles Peskine)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 14:42:33 +0000 (UTC)
From: "dany_banik2000(a)yahoo.com" <dany_banik2000(a)yahoo.com>
To: mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Subject: [mbed-tls] Problem with decrypt aes 128 in ecb mode. HELP ME!
Message-ID: <1371131400.5486983.1595428953399(a)mail.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
I developed a server application that obtains the data from a dht11 sensor, I encrypt it with aes 128 and publish it on the server. The client application makes a request to the server, and I would like to decrypt the answer.
When I want to display decrypted message, it shows garbage
The message retrieved from the server is in hex. I think that must to convert hex in binary, but i don’t know how can do it…
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.trustedfirmware.org/pipermail/mbed-tls/attachments/20200722/a5…>
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 17:10:18 +0200
From: Gilles Peskine <gilles.peskine(a)arm.com>
To: mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Subject: Re: [mbed-tls] SSH client sample
Message-ID: <4a7265ac-7b3e-33ef-7222-4cd29c3cda08(a)arm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Hi Christie,
Libssh2 (https://github.com/libssh2/libssh2) supports Mbed TLS.
I've never used it or investigated it, so I can't vouch for it, I just know that it's there.
--
Gilles Peskine
Mbed TLS developer
On 21/07/2020 18:40, Christie Su via mbed-tls wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> �
>
> I am using FRDM-K64F with LWIP+mbedTLS for our control system. Now, I
> want to develop the SSH client(or telnet 22) to access my SSH server.
>
> �
>
> Could you give me some indications how to do it? Or do you have any
> sample project?
>
> �
>
> Thanks,
>
> �
>
> Christie
>
>
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 17:34:44 +0200
From: Gilles Peskine <gilles.peskine(a)arm.com>
To: mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Subject: Re: [mbed-tls] patches for low memory
Message-ID: <152f6571-6972-8262-c38d-d200dcc7c0b7(a)arm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Hi Nick,
A TLS stack in 6kB of RAM sounds impressive, congratulations!
We'd certainly be interested in all the improvements you can contribute.
The process is documented in CONTRIBUTING.md (https://github.com/ARMmbed/mbedtls/blob/development/CONTRIBUTING.md). I just need to warn you that the limiting factor is reviewers' time. For a significant contribution, it may take a while before the Mbed TLS team can look at it in detail. Small patches are usually easier than large
ones: if something only takes half an hour to review, someone will probably do it when they're stuck on some other task. If a review takes several days, it needs to be scheduled.
It would probably be better to discuss the general nature of the changes on this mailing list first. Is a new compilation option needed? Is an API change needed? What is the risk that the change might break existing code? How is the new code tested? etc.
Which version of Mbed TLS have you been using? We've made a few changes that are of interest to low-memory platforms recently, such as the option MBEDTLS_SSL_VARIABLE_BUFFER_LENGTH to resize SSL buffers after the handshake (new in 2.22).
I don't know what the issue with the incoming SSL packet header length could be. If you could give precise steps to reproduce the issue, this would be very helpful. Eventually we'd want to construct a test in tests/ssl-opt.sh for this.
--
Gilles Peskine
Mbed TLS developer
On 17/07/2020 21:00, Nick Setzer via mbed-tls wrote:
>
> Hi, I have been working with Mbed TLS for the last 6 months in an
> extremely low memory use case. This library has been an absolute joy
> to work with because of how flexible it is. I have an interesting use
> case with how little RAM I have to work with (around 6kb on one
> microprocessor) and I have made some changes that I thought would be
> of interest. I'm not sure if I should submit them as a single
> changeset or a set of changes. I'll describe the changes and if there
> is interest I can clean them up for submission.
>
> The first change that I made was for a scenario with two
> microprocessors communicating over a UART. I was already using TLS
> offloading so that the private key was on one processor (with only 6kb
> of RAM free) and the SSL context stored on the other. I required
> generating a CSR and thus made some changes to the CSR code to be able
> to generate the CSR using a similar private key offloading strategy.
>
> I found an issue with downloading firmware for OTA from openssl web
> servers. This is a little tricky to describe. The server was not
> responsive to requests for reducing the max fragment length, which
> forced me to use MBEDTLS_SSL_MAX_CONTENT_LEN set to 16384. But I
> needed to have multiple ssl sessions open for other activities and did
> not have enough RAM to hold multiple large buffers. I have made a set
> of changes to allow setting the content length when the ssl context is
> initialized, as well as setting different IN and OUT content lengths
> to save memory. This change allowed me to set up one session with 16kb
> for the IN content length, and then 4kb for OUT content length, while
> a second session could use 2kb for a total of 24kb instead of 64kb.
>
> Related to the openssl issue, I found that the incoming ssl packet
> header length can sometimes be 8 or 16 bytes larger than expected
> depending on which AES method is selected. I'm not actually sure what
> the best way to solve this is. One way may be to change
> MBEDTLS_SSL_HEADER_LEN from 13 to 29 bytes. However I ended up solving
> it by adding 16 to both MBEDTLS_SSL_IN_BUFFER_LEN and
> MBEDTLS_SSL_OUT_BUFFER_LEN. This way I could handle the larger ssl
> header as well as receive the content body.
>
> If these three changes sound interesting I can start work on cleaning
> up the code to be less specific to my company and then submit the
> changes. Also I would like to know if there is any process I should be
> following when submitting these changes.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Nick Setzer
> SimpliSafe, Inc.
> 294 Washington Street, 9th Floor
> Boston, MA 02108
>
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
mbed-tls mailing list
mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/mbed-tls
------------------------------
End of mbed-tls Digest, Vol 5, Issue 15
***************************************
On 20/07/2020 12:21, Scott Branden via mbed-tls wrote:
> Although this particular change doesn't affect me - rewriting history is a
> bad idea.
>
> Why not simply commit a revert back to a cleaner point on "master" branch
> and then commit the new changes you want from there?
>
> Then history is not lost on master branch.
Mbed TLS used to follow the Git Flow model: day-to-day work happens on
the 'development' branch, and there's a 'master' branch which always
points to the latest commit on master that's a tagged release. A release
is done by tagging a commit on 'development' and fast-forwarding
'master' to it.
But after the 2.16 LTS release, we made 'master' follow the 2.16 LTS
branch rather than 'development'. I think this was a mistake, but it's
too late to change this, the question is what we do now with the
existing situation.
A force-push on 'master' would not erase history from the face of the
world. The history is still there in 'mbedtls-2.16'.
It is no longer possible to fast-forward 'master' to any commit on
'development'. No amount of revert or merge commits on 'master' will
make it be the same commit as some a release made from 'development'.
Without a force-push, all we can hope is to have 'master' have the same
content as a release. This means that getting the same release would
give you the same content, but different history, depending on whether
tyou get it from 'master' or 'development'. This would also mean a more
complicated release process.
Another solution would be to do a merge of 'master' into 'development',
ignoring all changes from the 'master' side. But this would mess up the
history on 'development'.
Is this more complicated release process, or this messy history, worth
it, just to avoid a force-push?
> Or, with the BLM movement some repos are stopping use of master branch.
> github seems to be encourage it going forware:
> https://www.zdnet.com/article/github-to-replace-master-with-alternative-ter…
>
> So another option: stop using "master" branch. You could even create a
> tag/rename and then delete the branch name to avoid any confusions. History
> won't be rewritten then, just a little "hidden".
> And start using a new "main" branch. You can push you entire commit series
> there without revering anything on master branch.
Sure, we can create a new branch name. But then we'd still have to keep
a branch with the old name, for the sake of existing setups that pull
from 'master'. Or else we should make a commit on 'master' that removes
every file and instead adds a README that says "pull from 'main' instead".
--
Gilles Peskine
Mbed TLS developer
On 22/07/2020 17:35, Gilles Peskine via mbed-tls wrote:
> I just need to warn you that the limiting factor is reviewers' time. For a
> significant contribution, it may take a while before the Mbed TLS team
> can look at it in detail. Small patches are usually easier than large
> ones: if something only takes half an hour to review, someone will
> probably do it when they're stuck on some other task. If a review takes
> several days, it needs to be scheduled.
As an aside, Mbed TLS is under the governance of TrustedFirmware.
Currently, only Arm employees are consider trusted reviewers, but this
is not by policy, it's only due to the history of the project (until a
few months ago, Mbed TLS was governed by Arm). We (as in, the Arm
employees working on Mbed TLS) welcome design and code reviews from
everyone.
We don't yet have a formal process for becoming a “trusted” reviewer,
beyond the general principles of TrustedFirmware. But a required part of
that process will undoubtedly be to have done some reviews before.
As every project, there is an informal, unwritten culture. If there's
interest, we can try to document our review culture in writing. If I had
to sum it up in one sentence, I'd say that if a reviewer should reject
code that they don't understand: it's the job of the patch author to
convince reviewers that the patch is good. “I don't see anything wrong”
is not a good enough standard.
--
Gilles Peskine
Mbed TLS developer
Hi Nick,
A TLS stack in 6kB of RAM sounds impressive, congratulations!
We'd certainly be interested in all the improvements you can contribute.
The process is documented in CONTRIBUTING.md
(https://github.com/ARMmbed/mbedtls/blob/development/CONTRIBUTING.md). I
just need to warn you that the limiting factor is reviewers' time. For a
significant contribution, it may take a while before the Mbed TLS team
can look at it in detail. Small patches are usually easier than large
ones: if something only takes half an hour to review, someone will
probably do it when they're stuck on some other task. If a review takes
several days, it needs to be scheduled.
It would probably be better to discuss the general nature of the changes
on this mailing list first. Is a new compilation option needed? Is an
API change needed? What is the risk that the change might break existing
code? How is the new code tested? etc.
Which version of Mbed TLS have you been using? We've made a few changes
that are of interest to low-memory platforms recently, such as the
option MBEDTLS_SSL_VARIABLE_BUFFER_LENGTH to resize SSL buffers after
the handshake (new in 2.22).
I don't know what the issue with the incoming SSL packet header length
could be. If you could give precise steps to reproduce the issue, this
would be very helpful. Eventually we'd want to construct a test in
tests/ssl-opt.sh for this.
--
Gilles Peskine
Mbed TLS developer
On 17/07/2020 21:00, Nick Setzer via mbed-tls wrote:
>
> Hi, I have been working with Mbed TLS for the last 6 months in an
> extremely low memory use case. This library has been an absolute joy
> to work with because of how flexible it is. I have an interesting use
> case with how little RAM I have to work with (around 6kb on one
> microprocessor) and I have made some changes that I thought would be
> of interest. I'm not sure if I should submit them as a single
> changeset or a set of changes. I'll describe the changes and if there
> is interest I can clean them up for submission.
>
> The first change that I made was for a scenario with two
> microprocessors communicating over a UART. I was already using TLS
> offloading so that the private key was on one processor (with only 6kb
> of RAM free) and the SSL context stored on the other. I required
> generating a CSR and thus made some changes to the CSR code to be able
> to generate the CSR using a similar private key offloading strategy.
>
> I found an issue with downloading firmware for OTA from openssl web
> servers. This is a little tricky to describe. The server was not
> responsive to requests for reducing the max fragment length, which
> forced me to use MBEDTLS_SSL_MAX_CONTENT_LEN set to 16384. But I
> needed to have multiple ssl sessions open for other activities and did
> not have enough RAM to hold multiple large buffers. I have made a set
> of changes to allow setting the content length when the ssl context is
> initialized, as well as setting different IN and OUT content lengths
> to save memory. This change allowed me to set up one session with 16kb
> for the IN content length, and then 4kb for OUT content length, while
> a second session could use 2kb for a total of 24kb instead of 64kb.
>
> Related to the openssl issue, I found that the incoming ssl packet
> header length can sometimes be 8 or 16 bytes larger than expected
> depending on which AES method is selected. I'm not actually sure what
> the best way to solve this is. One way may be to change
> MBEDTLS_SSL_HEADER_LEN from 13 to 29 bytes. However I ended up solving
> it by adding 16 to both MBEDTLS_SSL_IN_BUFFER_LEN and
> MBEDTLS_SSL_OUT_BUFFER_LEN. This way I could handle the larger ssl
> header as well as receive the content body.
>
> If these three changes sound interesting I can start work on cleaning
> up the code to be less specific to my company and then submit the
> changes. Also I would like to know if there is any process I should be
> following when submitting these changes.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Nick Setzer
> SimpliSafe, Inc.
> 294 Washington Street, 9th Floor
> Boston, MA 02108
>
Hi Christie,
Libssh2 (https://github.com/libssh2/libssh2) supports Mbed TLS.
I've never used it or investigated it, so I can't vouch for it, I just
know that it's there.
--
Gilles Peskine
Mbed TLS developer
On 21/07/2020 18:40, Christie Su via mbed-tls wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> �
>
> I am using FRDM-K64F with LWIP+mbedTLS for our control system. Now, I
> want to develop the SSH client(or telnet 22) to access my SSH server.
>
> �
>
> Could you give me some indications how to do it? Or do you have any
> sample project?
>
> �
>
> Thanks,
>
> �
>
> Christie
>
>
I developed a server application that obtains the data from a dht11 sensor, I encrypt it with aes 128 and publish it on the server. The client application makes a request to the server, and I would like to decrypt the answer.
When I want to display decrypted message, it shows garbage
The message retrieved from the server is in hex. I think that must to convert hex in binary, but i don’t know how can do it…
Hi,
I am using FRDM-K64F with LWIP+mbedTLS for our control system. Now, I want to develop the SSH client(or telnet 22) to access my SSH server.
Could you give me some indications how to do it? Or do you have any sample project?
Thanks,
Christie
Hi, I have been working with Mbed TLS for the last 6 months in an extremely
low memory use case. This library has been an absolute joy to work with
because of how flexible it is. I have an interesting use case with how
little RAM I have to work with (around 6kb on one microprocessor) and I
have made some changes that I thought would be of interest. I'm not sure if
I should submit them as a single changeset or a set of changes. I'll
describe the changes and if there is interest I can clean them up for
submission.
The first change that I made was for a scenario with two microprocessors
communicating over a UART. I was already using TLS offloading so that the
private key was on one processor (with only 6kb of RAM free) and the SSL
context stored on the other. I required generating a CSR and thus made some
changes to the CSR code to be able to generate the CSR using a similar
private key offloading strategy.
I found an issue with downloading firmware for OTA from openssl web
servers. This is a little tricky to describe. The server was not responsive
to requests for reducing the max fragment length, which forced me to use
MBEDTLS_SSL_MAX_CONTENT_LEN set to 16384. But I needed to have multiple ssl
sessions open for other activities and did not have enough RAM to hold
multiple large buffers. I have made a set of changes to allow setting the
content length when the ssl context is initialized, as well as setting
different IN and OUT content lengths to save memory. This change allowed me
to set up one session with 16kb for the IN content length, and then 4kb for
OUT content length, while a second session could use 2kb for a total of
24kb instead of 64kb.
Related to the openssl issue, I found that the incoming ssl packet header
length can sometimes be 8 or 16 bytes larger than expected depending on
which AES method is selected. I'm not actually sure what the best way to
solve this is. One way may be to change MBEDTLS_SSL_HEADER_LEN from 13 to
29 bytes. However I ended up solving it by adding 16 to both
MBEDTLS_SSL_IN_BUFFER_LEN
and MBEDTLS_SSL_OUT_BUFFER_LEN. This way I could handle the larger ssl
header as well as receive the content body.
If these three changes sound interesting I can start work on cleaning up
the code to be less specific to my company and then submit the changes.
Also I would like to know if there is any process I should be following
when submitting these changes.
Thanks,
Nick Setzer
SimpliSafe, Inc.
294 Washington Street, 9th Floor
Boston, MA 02108
Although this particular change doesn't affect me - rewriting history is a
bad idea.
Why not simply commit a revert back to a cleaner point on "master" branch
and then commit the new changes you want from there?
Then history is not lost on master branch.
Or, with the BLM movement some repos are stopping use of master branch.
github seems to be encourage it going forware:
https://www.zdnet.com/article/github-to-replace-master-with-alternative-ter…
So another option: stop using "master" branch. You could even create a
tag/rename and then delete the branch name to avoid any confusions. History
won't be rewritten then, just a little "hidden".
And start using a new "main" branch. You can push you entire commit series
there without revering anything on master branch.
Regards,
Scott
-----Original Message-----
From: Mbed-tls-announce
[mailto:mbed-tls-announce-bounces@lists.trustedfirmware.org] On Behalf Of
Janos Follath via Mbed-tls-announce
Sent: Thursday, July 16, 2020 4:09 AM
To: mbed-tls-announce(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Cc: nd <nd(a)arm.com>
Subject: [Mbed-tls-announce] Force push on the master branch
Hi All,
The master branch used to track the latest development release. This changed
in early 2019 after the 2.16 LTS branch was released. Around this time the
cryptography library of Mbed TLS was moved to a separate repository and
since then it was used as a submodule. This was one of the main reasons
behind the decision to keep master pointing to the 2.16 LTS releases.
Recently we have merged the cryptography library back into Mbed TLS. We
don't have any reasons any more to keep master tracking the 2.16 LTS
release. Therefore we intend to update master to the latest development
release. This will happen on 3rd August.
The update will involve a force push, which can be disruptive to those users
who take Mbed TLS from master. We would like to give such users enough time
to adapt to this change. If you are relying on the master branch in a way
that this force push affects you, please let us know on the developer
mailing list<https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/mbed-tls>
and we will do our best to accommodate your needs.
Thanks and regards,
Janos
(on behalf of the Mbed TLS maintainer team)
--
Mbed-tls-announce mailing list
Mbed-tls-announce(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/mbed-tls-announce
Hi All,
The master branch used to track the latest development release. This changed in early 2019 after the 2.16 LTS branch was released. Around this time the cryptography library of Mbed TLS was moved to a separate repository and since then it was used as a submodule. This was one of the main reasons behind the decision to keep master pointing to the 2.16 LTS releases.
Recently we have merged the cryptography library back into Mbed TLS. We don't have any reasons any more to keep master tracking the 2.16 LTS release. Therefore we intend to update master to the latest development release. This will happen on 3rd August.
The update will involve a force push, which can be disruptive to those users who take Mbed TLS from master. We would like to give such users enough time to adapt to this change. If you are relying on the master branch in a way that this force push affects you, please let us know on the developer mailing list<https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/mbed-tls> and we will do our best to accommodate your needs.
Thanks and regards,
Janos
(on behalf of the Mbed TLS maintainer team)
--
Mbed-tls-announce mailing list
Mbed-tls-announce(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/mbed-tls-announce
Hi Jeff,
> Given the age of the version of mbedTLS I’m using, which is 2.13.1, plus the recent security alert, I think I need to upgrade the version of mbedTLS we have. The question is, which version to use?
Indeed upgrading to a maintained branch is very recommended! There are currently two actively maintained branches you could use:
* 2.16.x, which is our latest LTS branch, currently at 2.16.7. As an LTS branch, it only receives bug fixes and security updates, so it's pretty stable. In particular, since it doesn't receive any new feature, its footprint (code size) should remain mostly stable as well.
* 2.x.y, released from the development branch, currently at 2.23.0. This is the branch where new features land.
Both of these have full API compatibility with 2.13.1. We take great care not to break API compatibility between major releases - we haven't broken it since Mbed TLS 2.0.0 (release 2015-07-13), and the next release to break API compatibility with be 3.0.0 (now planned for early 2021). Until then, upgrading should be a simple matter of replacing the mbedtls directory in your source tree with the version of your choice, then rebuilding your project. (Moreover in the LTS branches we actually try maintain ABI compatibility as far as possible - that is, unless there's a security issue that can only be fixed by changing the ABI.)
Mbed TLS is designed bo be quite modular an integrate with the OS and networking stack via user-provided hooks and compile-time configuration (`include/mbedtls/config.h`). I'm not sure how the integration with LwIP and FreeRTOS was done by your MCU vendor, but I suggest you check:
* is the mbedtls directory in your source tree identical to our upstream release? If yes, you should be able to just replace it with the release of your choice and things should work.
* otherwise, what's the nature of the differences: are filed shuffled to a different directory structure? is the build system different? has the `mbedtls/config.h` file been modified? have other files been modified (which ideally really shouldn't be necessary)? In that case, you'll probably need to apply the same changes to the upgraded version of Mbed TLS. Hopefully the differences if any will be small, and otherwise perhaps you MCU vendor can provide documentation about it.
So I can't really say for this specific integration, but in principle upgrading Mbed TLS should be really painless - precisely so that people can upgrade easily in case of security fixes.
Hope this helps, and let us know how it went!
Regards,
Manuel.
________________________________
From: mbed-tls <mbed-tls-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> on behalf of Thompson, Jeff via mbed-tls <mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Sent: 14 July 2020 22:11
To: mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Subject: [mbed-tls] Upgrading from 2.13.1.to ??.??.??
Given the age of the version of mbedTLS I’m using, which is 2.13.1, plus the recent security alert, I think I need to upgrade the version of mbedTLS we have. The question is, which version to use?
Because we got mbedTLS as example code from the MCU vendor, it was already integrated with lwIP and FreeRTOS. I’m sure this will not be a trivial effort, but I do need to present my management with some idea of the time it could take. Does anyone have a rough estimate of what to expect? I’m thinking on the order of 2 to 4 weeks for someone who is an experienced C programmer, but unfamiliar with either mbedTLS or lwIP. Or is that a pipe dream, with the actual time being closer to 3 or 4 months?
Jeff Thompson | Senior Electrical Engineer-Firmware
+1 704 752 6513 x1394
www.invue.com
[cid:image001.gif@01D659E2.BE6C0700]
Given the age of the version of mbedTLS I'm using, which is 2.13.1, plus the recent security alert, I think I need to upgrade the version of mbedTLS we have. The question is, which version to use?
Because we got mbedTLS as example code from the MCU vendor, it was already integrated with lwIP and FreeRTOS. I'm sure this will not be a trivial effort, but I do need to present my management with some idea of the time it could take. Does anyone have a rough estimate of what to expect? I'm thinking on the order of 2 to 4 weeks for someone who is an experienced C programmer, but unfamiliar with either mbedTLS or lwIP. Or is that a pipe dream, with the actual time being closer to 3 or 4 months?
Jeff Thompson | Senior Electrical Engineer-Firmware
+1 704 752 6513 x1394
www.invue.com
[cid:image001.gif@01D659E2.BE6C0700]
Hi;
For a while I've had a couple of projects pulling in mbed-tls from the
trustedfirmware.org git repository at
https://git.trustedfirmware.org/tls/mbed-tls.git
However, I just attempted to clone from that repository again only to
discover it's now empty! I've searched around and I can't find any
messaging on why this would be the case, so it's either an accident or my
search foo is failing me.
It looks like the majority of development for mbed-tls is still happening
on github at https://github.com/ARMmbed/mbedtls.git but I'd rather point my
upstream to the canonical location.
Is this a temporary outage, or should github be considered the origin of
all things mbed-tls?
Thanks,
Matt Walker
Hi all,
I have been using Mbed TLS with mutual certificate-based authentication all the time.
Here is the configuration:
[cid:image004.jpg@01D65150.65DFD610]
Here is a link to a webinar where I talk about certificate-based authentication and show-case mutual authentication with a Keil development board:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iH4v-aXQ2zQ<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iH4v-aXQ2zQ&feature=emb_logo>
Slides are here: http://www2.keil.com/docs/default-source/default-document-library/keil_mbed…
>From what I can tell (trying to connect to your test server myself) you haven't configured the auth_mode=required on the server side.
Without it the TLS server will not send a CertificateRequest message.
Ciao
Hannes
From: mbed-tls <mbed-tls-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of Abhilash Iyer via mbed-tls
Sent: Friday, July 3, 2020 2:56 PM
To: Subramanian Gopi Krishnan <gopikrishnan.subramanian(a)kone.com>
Cc: mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Subject: Re: [mbed-tls] Mutual Authentication in TLS handshake - No client certificate passed
Hi Gopi,
Thank you very much for your feedback. I double checked all the recommended configuration that you mentioned but it did not help. I really suspect if I have hit a mbedTLS limitation here.
Following our conversation, I tried connecting to the server using openSSL.
Server: https://preview.auth.edgeai.azure.net/api/v1/device/auth<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpreview.a…>
OpenSSL commands:
OpenSSL> s_client -connect preview.auth.edgeai.azure.net:443 -showcerts -debug -msg -state -tls1_2 -cert certificate1.pem -key privateKey1.pem
GET /api/v1/device/auth HTTP/1.1
HOST:preview.auth.edgeai.azure.net
With the above commands, I am able to send the client certificate to the server. I have attached the openSSL logs to show the flow of TLS activity.
As per the logs attached, this is the flow of activity:
1. In the first TLS handshake there is no certificate request and no client certificate sent. I see ClientHello, ServerHello, ServerCertificate, ServerKeyExchange, Server Done, ClientKeyExchange, Change cipher spec, Certificate chain information and Server Cert. Till here, I do see: No client certificate CA names sent.
2. Now when I do a Get call & pass the HOST, client writes that call to the server and in turn the server returns me a "HelloRequest" which is encrypted. Now, this chain of handshake has a CertificateRequest, ClientCertificate, CertificateVerify etc. I see that 1009 bytes of data been written on the server under the name of client certificate. There is no way to see this certificate because the channel is encrypted now.
3. Lastly, we get HTTP/1.1 200 OK.
Now when I do the same thing using the mbedTLS client on windows 10 PC, I see that the client gets reset during the renegotiation process. Note that the client cert was supposed to be exchanged in the renegotiation period, not the initial handshake. I have attached the logs for mbedTLS client as well and here are the commands that I use to communicate using mbedTLS client.
ssl_client2.exe server_name=preview.auth.edgeai.azure.net server_port=443 debug_level=5 auth_mode=required renegotiate=1 reconnect=1 request_page=/api/v1/device/auth crt_file=certificate1.pem key_file=privateKey1.pem ca_file=server_prev1.pem
I am wondering if this type of exchange of certs is not supported by mbedTLS at all. But it doesn't work with the remote server since this server looks for the client cert in the renegotiation phase to retain client certificate privacy. Can you confirm that this is a MBEDTLS limitation and have to move to a different library?
Thanks,
Abhilash
From: Subramanian Gopi Krishnan <gopikrishnan.subramanian(a)kone.com<mailto:gopikrishnan.subramanian@kone.com>>
Sent: Sunday, June 28, 2020 8:58 PM
To: Abhilash Iyer <Abhilash.Iyer(a)microsoft.com<mailto:Abhilash.Iyer@microsoft.com>>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: [mbed-tls] Mutual Authentication in TLS handshake - No client certificate passed
Hi Abilash,
Few things to verify
1. On server side - make sure the authentication mode is set to required instead of optional.
* Test with browser, does Handshake is succeeding if cancelling to select Certificate.
* If the above were success, then proceed to modify auth_mode on server as below and test once again.
* mbedtls_ssl_conf_authmode( &conf, MBEDTLS_SSL_VERIFY_REQUIRED ); - insisting Server to Request Certificate.
2. On client side - check does it has a valid Certificate & Key set to TLS Configuration
* mbedtls_ssl_conf_own_cert( &conf, &clicert, &pkey );
Thanks,
Gopi Krishnan
From: mbed-tls <mbed-tls-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:mbed-tls-bounces@lists.trustedfirmware.org>> On Behalf Of Abhilash Iyer via mbed-tls
Sent: Monday, June 22, 2020 2:00 PM
To: mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:mbed-tls@lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Subject: [mbed-tls] Mutual Authentication in TLS handshake - No client certificate passed
This message is from an external sender. Be cautious, especially with links and attachments.
Hello,
I am trying to incorporate Mutual Authentication TLS in my hardware. For testing the mutual authentication in TLS, I setup a demo service which would request a client certificate in the TLS handshake. I used MS Edge, Google Chrome to test whether the service requests a client certificate during the TLS 1.2 handshake. When I ping the website, I do receive a request for a client certificate as shown in the image below. On selecting a certificate, I am able to access the website.
Link to the demo service: https://serviceforsomsecurity.azurewebsites.net/<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fservicefo…>
[A screenshot of a cell phone Description automatically generated]
The above validates that the service requires the client to provide the client certificate during the TLS handshake.
Now, when I test this with the sample mbedTLS ssl_client2.c program: https://github.com/ARMmbed/mbedtls/blob/development/programs/ssl/ssl_client…<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.co…>, the client does not send a certificate at all.
The following are the steps that I carry out to test the TLS connection with my service with the sample mbedTLS ssl_client2.exe :
1. Open the mbedTLS.sln and build the ssl_client2 project. This creates a ssl_client2.exe under the Debug folder.
2. ssl_client2.exe server_name=serviceforsomsecurity.azurewebsites.net server_port=443 debug_level=3 auth_mode=required reconnect=1 crt_file=cert.pem key_file=key.pem ca_file=Digicert.cer force_version=tls1_2
The above command to test whether the client sends the client certificate during handshake. Here's the log:
[A screenshot of a computer Description automatically generated]
As you can see, in 3025 client receives: got no certificate request and then followed by server hello done at 3157. And then at 2080 & 2094, client skips writing certificate; during this handshake.
3. Then I tried including renegotiation flag:
ssl_client2.exe server_name=serviceforsomsecurity.azurewebsites.net server_port=443 debug_level=3 auth_mode=required reconnect=1 crt_file=cert.pem key_file=key.pem ca_file=Digicert.cer force_version=tls1_2 renegotiate=1
Even in this case, the client does not get the certificate and abruptly ends during renegotiation due to timeout.
I have included both the log files below for complete handshake review. [ssl_client_without_renegotiation.txt and ssl_client_with_renegotiation.txt]
Can you please let me know how to debug this client certificate problem? It will be really a great help!
Million thanks in advance.
Regards,
Abhilash
Hi Gopi,
Thank you very much for your feedback. I double checked all the recommended configuration that you mentioned but it did not help. I really suspect if I have hit a mbedTLS limitation here.
Following our conversation, I tried connecting to the server using openSSL.
Server: https://preview.auth.edgeai.azure.net/api/v1/device/auth<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpreview.a…>
OpenSSL commands:
OpenSSL> s_client -connect preview.auth.edgeai.azure.net:443 -showcerts -debug -msg -state -tls1_2 -cert certificate1.pem -key privateKey1.pem
GET /api/v1/device/auth HTTP/1.1
HOST:preview.auth.edgeai.azure.net
With the above commands, I am able to send the client certificate to the server. I have attached the openSSL logs to show the flow of TLS activity.
As per the logs attached, this is the flow of activity:
1. In the first TLS handshake there is no certificate request and no client certificate sent. I see ClientHello, ServerHello, ServerCertificate, ServerKeyExchange, Server Done, ClientKeyExchange, Change cipher spec, Certificate chain information and Server Cert. Till here, I do see: No client certificate CA names sent.
2. Now when I do a Get call & pass the HOST, client writes that call to the server and in turn the server returns me a "HelloRequest" which is encrypted. Now, this chain of handshake has a CertificateRequest, ClientCertificate, CertificateVerify etc. I see that 1009 bytes of data been written on the server under the name of client certificate. There is no way to see this certificate because the channel is encrypted now.
3. Lastly, we get HTTP/1.1 200 OK.
Now when I do the same thing using the mbedTLS client on windows 10 PC, I see that the client gets reset during the renegotiation process. Note that the client cert was supposed to be exchanged in the renegotiation period, not the initial handshake. I have attached the logs for mbedTLS client as well and here are the commands that I use to communicate using mbedTLS client.
ssl_client2.exe server_name=preview.auth.edgeai.azure.net server_port=443 debug_level=5 auth_mode=required renegotiate=1 reconnect=1 request_page=/api/v1/device/auth crt_file=certificate1.pem key_file=privateKey1.pem ca_file=server_prev1.pem
I am wondering if this type of exchange of certs is not supported by mbedTLS at all. But it doesn't work with the remote server since this server looks for the client cert in the renegotiation phase to retain client certificate privacy. Can you confirm that this is a MBEDTLS limitation and have to move to a different library?
Thanks,
Abhilash
From: Subramanian Gopi Krishnan <gopikrishnan.subramanian(a)kone.com>
Sent: Sunday, June 28, 2020 8:58 PM
To: Abhilash Iyer <Abhilash.Iyer(a)microsoft.com>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: [mbed-tls] Mutual Authentication in TLS handshake - No client certificate passed
Hi Abilash,
Few things to verify
1. On server side - make sure the authentication mode is set to required instead of optional.
* Test with browser, does Handshake is succeeding if cancelling to select Certificate.
* If the above were success, then proceed to modify auth_mode on server as below and test once again.
* mbedtls_ssl_conf_authmode( &conf, MBEDTLS_SSL_VERIFY_REQUIRED ); - insisting Server to Request Certificate.
2. On client side - check does it has a valid Certificate & Key set to TLS Configuration
* mbedtls_ssl_conf_own_cert( &conf, &clicert, &pkey );
Thanks,
Gopi Krishnan
From: mbed-tls <mbed-tls-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:mbed-tls-bounces@lists.trustedfirmware.org>> On Behalf Of Abhilash Iyer via mbed-tls
Sent: Monday, June 22, 2020 2:00 PM
To: mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:mbed-tls@lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Subject: [mbed-tls] Mutual Authentication in TLS handshake - No client certificate passed
This message is from an external sender. Be cautious, especially with links and attachments.
Hello,
I am trying to incorporate Mutual Authentication TLS in my hardware. For testing the mutual authentication in TLS, I setup a demo service which would request a client certificate in the TLS handshake. I used MS Edge, Google Chrome to test whether the service requests a client certificate during the TLS 1.2 handshake. When I ping the website, I do receive a request for a client certificate as shown in the image below. On selecting a certificate, I am able to access the website.
Link to the demo service: https://serviceforsomsecurity.azurewebsites.net/<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fservicefo…>
[A screenshot of a cell phone Description automatically generated]
The above validates that the service requires the client to provide the client certificate during the TLS handshake.
Now, when I test this with the sample mbedTLS ssl_client2.c program: https://github.com/ARMmbed/mbedtls/blob/development/programs/ssl/ssl_client…<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.co…>, the client does not send a certificate at all.
The following are the steps that I carry out to test the TLS connection with my service with the sample mbedTLS ssl_client2.exe :
1. Open the mbedTLS.sln and build the ssl_client2 project. This creates a ssl_client2.exe under the Debug folder.
2. ssl_client2.exe server_name=serviceforsomsecurity.azurewebsites.net server_port=443 debug_level=3 auth_mode=required reconnect=1 crt_file=cert.pem key_file=key.pem ca_file=Digicert.cer force_version=tls1_2
The above command to test whether the client sends the client certificate during handshake. Here's the log:
[A screenshot of a computer Description automatically generated]
As you can see, in 3025 client receives: got no certificate request and then followed by server hello done at 3157. And then at 2080 & 2094, client skips writing certificate; during this handshake.
3. Then I tried including renegotiation flag:
ssl_client2.exe server_name=serviceforsomsecurity.azurewebsites.net server_port=443 debug_level=3 auth_mode=required reconnect=1 crt_file=cert.pem key_file=key.pem ca_file=Digicert.cer force_version=tls1_2 renegotiate=1
Even in this case, the client does not get the certificate and abruptly ends during renegotiation due to timeout.
I have included both the log files below for complete handshake review. [ssl_client_without_renegotiation.txt and ssl_client_with_renegotiation.txt]
Can you please let me know how to debug this client certificate problem? It will be really a great help!
Million thanks in advance.
Regards,
Abhilash
Welcome to the Mbed TLS Announcement list @ TrustedFirmware.org!
This mailing list is the primary channel for announcements about upcoming Mbed TLS releases and security advisories.
This mailing list includes all members of the higher traffic developer mailing list<https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/mbed-tls>. Therefore all announcements will also appear on the developer mailing list and there is no need to subscribe to both.
Thanks and regards
Janos
(on behalf of the Mbed TLS maintainer team)
IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you.
--
Mbed-tls-announce mailing list
Mbed-tls-announce(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/mbed-tls-announce
Hi all
The new TrustedFirmware.org security incident process is now live. This process is described here:
https://developer.trustedfirmware.org/w/collaboration/security_center/repor…
Initially the process will be used for the following projects: TF-A, TF-M, OP-TEE and Mbed TLS. The security documentation for each project will be updated soon to reflect this change.
If you are part of an organization that believes it should receive security vulnerability information before it is made public then please ask your relevant colleagues to register as Trusted Stakeholders as described here:
https://developer.trustedfirmware.org/w/collaboration/security_center/trust…
Note we prefer individuals in each organization to coordinate their registration requests with each other and to provide us with an email alias managed by your organization instead of us managing a long list of individual addresses.
Best regards
Dan.
(on behalf of the TrustedFirmware.org security team)
The TLS protocol has many options. A TLS connection starts with a
handshake whose role is mostly for the client and the server to agree on
these options. The ciphersuite is one of these options. It determines
which cryptographic primitives will be used for the various security
properties (data confidentiality, data integrity, server authentication,
etc.).
A ciphersuite mismatch, or more generally a mismatch of some option of
the protocol, or a certificate mismatch, would normally result in the
dissatisfied party closing the connection. For a ciphersuite mismatch,
the server should send an alert "handshake failure". For a certificate
mismatch, there are several alerts ("bad certificate", "certificate
expired", etc.).
The first tool to turn to when debugging a TLS connection is Wireshark.
Compare a failing connection with a successful connection with similar
settings (preferably to the same server). Keep in mind that there can be
many legitimate differences, so the first difference might not be the
source of the problem. You can try connecting with
programs/ssl/ssl_client2 from the mbedtls source tree with different
sets of options.
For some background on how a TLS connection should work, I suggest
starting with Wikipedia, then
https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/20803/how-does-ssl-tls-work
and https://tls.ulfheim.net/ (The Illustrated TLS Connection — note that
while it's a very good explanation, it's for a specific choice of
ciphersuite and other options).
--
Gilles Peskine
Mbed TLS developer
On 29/06/2020 03:02, Thompson, Jeff via mbed-tls wrote:
> Another baby step in discovering what's happening. The last message
> from the server tells the client to change ciphersuites. I don't even
> know what a ciohersuite actually is—something like RSA, AES, or
> DES?—never mind how to change mine, though I have seen the list; my,
> what a lot of conditionals it has.
>
> So, am I still dealing with a certificate issue? Where do I go from here?
>
> Get Outlook for Android <https://aka.ms/ghei36>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* mbed-tls <mbed-tls-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> on
> behalf of Thompson, Jeff via mbed-tls <mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
> *Sent:* Friday, June 26, 2020 12:52:27 PM
> *To:* mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
> <mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [mbed-tls] Choosing a cipher
>
>
> A little progress. I figured out where—ssl_encrypt_buf() in
> ssl_tls.c—to output the name of the offending ciphersuite, which is
> included in all 3 of the preconfigure Google Cloud SSL policies.
>
>
>
> So what’s going on here? Why should the mbedTLS client wait forever
> for 5 bytes it will never get, stalling the connection, instead timing
> out or otherwise detecting an error it could return?
>
>
>
> I’m totally at a loss for what to do with this, other than looking for
> a commercially supported alternative, which I don’t think would be
> received very well by my manager.
>
>
>
> *Jeff Thompson* | Senior Electrical Engineer-Firmware
> +1 704 752 6513 x1394
> www.invue.com
>
>
>
> *From:* Thompson, Jeff
> *Sent:* Friday, June 26, 2020 09:40
> *To:* mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
> *Subject:* Choosing a cipher
>
>
>
> The TLS handshake between my device and ghs.googlehosted.com gets
> stalled when the server sends the device a Change Cipher Spec
> message—the device waits forever, wanting 5 more bytes. From what I
> Google’d, I need to change the cipher suite I’m using. How do I know
> which cipher the server doesn’t like (so I can avoid that in future),
> and which one I should be using—there are scores of these available in
> the config file, though some of them clearly should not be used, as
> they are commented that way..
>
>
>
> *Jeff Thompson* | Senior Electrical Engineer-Firmware
> +1 704 752 6513 x1394
> www.invue.com
>
>
>
>
Hi Jeff,
There is a specification document for the TLS 1.2 handshake (RFC 5246: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5246) that I think might help finding out what is going on. There is a graph depicting the handshake on page 37 which I think can be particularly useful.
Regards,
Janos
From: mbed-tls <mbed-tls-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> on behalf of "Thompson, Jeff via mbed-tls" <mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Reply to: "Thompson, Jeff" <JeffThompson(a)invue.com>
Date: Monday, 29 June 2020 at 02:02
To: "mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org" <mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Subject: Re: [mbed-tls] Choosing a cipher
Another baby step in discovering what's happening. The last message from the server tells the client to change ciphersuites. I don't even know what a ciohersuite actually is—something like RSA, AES, or DES?—never mind how to change mine, though I have seen the list; my, what a lot of conditionals it has.
So, am I still dealing with a certificate issue? Where do I go from here?
Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36>
________________________________
From: mbed-tls <mbed-tls-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> on behalf of Thompson, Jeff via mbed-tls <mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Sent: Friday, June 26, 2020 12:52:27 PM
To: mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Subject: Re: [mbed-tls] Choosing a cipher
A little progress. I figured out where—ssl_encrypt_buf() in ssl_tls.c—to output the name of the offending ciphersuite, which is included in all 3 of the preconfigure Google Cloud SSL policies.
So what’s going on here? Why should the mbedTLS client wait forever for 5 bytes it will never get, stalling the connection, instead timing out or otherwise detecting an error it could return?
I’m totally at a loss for what to do with this, other than looking for a commercially supported alternative, which I don’t think would be received very well by my manager.
Jeff Thompson | Senior Electrical Engineer-Firmware
+1 704 752 6513 x1394
www.invue.com
[cid:image001.gif@01D64DFD.447A03C0]
From: Thompson, Jeff
Sent: Friday, June 26, 2020 09:40
To: mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Subject: Choosing a cipher
The TLS handshake between my device and ghs.googlehosted.com gets stalled when the server sends the device a Change Cipher Spec message—the device waits forever, wanting 5 more bytes. From what I Google’d, I need to change the cipher suite I’m using. How do I know which cipher the server doesn’t like (so I can avoid that in future), and which one I should be using—there are scores of these available in the config file, though some of them clearly should not be used, as they are commented that way..
Jeff Thompson | Senior Electrical Engineer-Firmware
+1 704 752 6513 x1394
www.invue.com
[cid:image001.gif@01D64DFD.447A03C0]
Another baby step in discovering what's happening. The last message from the server tells the client to change ciphersuites. I don't even know what a ciohersuite actually is—something like RSA, AES, or DES?—never mind how to change mine, though I have seen the list; my, what a lot of conditionals it has.
So, am I still dealing with a certificate issue? Where do I go from here?
Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36>
________________________________
From: mbed-tls <mbed-tls-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> on behalf of Thompson, Jeff via mbed-tls <mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Sent: Friday, June 26, 2020 12:52:27 PM
To: mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Subject: Re: [mbed-tls] Choosing a cipher
A little progress. I figured out where—ssl_encrypt_buf() in ssl_tls.c—to output the name of the offending ciphersuite, which is included in all 3 of the preconfigure Google Cloud SSL policies.
So what’s going on here? Why should the mbedTLS client wait forever for 5 bytes it will never get, stalling the connection, instead timing out or otherwise detecting an error it could return?
I’m totally at a loss for what to do with this, other than looking for a commercially supported alternative, which I don’t think would be received very well by my manager.
Jeff Thompson | Senior Electrical Engineer-Firmware
+1 704 752 6513 x1394
www.invue.com
[cid:image001.gif@01D64BB6.03781220]
From: Thompson, Jeff
Sent: Friday, June 26, 2020 09:40
To: mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Subject: Choosing a cipher
The TLS handshake between my device and ghs.googlehosted.com gets stalled when the server sends the device a Change Cipher Spec message—the device waits forever, wanting 5 more bytes. From what I Google’d, I need to change the cipher suite I’m using. How do I know which cipher the server doesn’t like (so I can avoid that in future), and which one I should be using—there are scores of these available in the config file, though some of them clearly should not be used, as they are commented that way..
Jeff Thompson | Senior Electrical Engineer-Firmware
+1 704 752 6513 x1394
www.invue.com
[cid:image001.gif@01D64BB6.03781220]
The TLS handshake between my device and ghs.googlehosted.com gets stalled when the server sends the device a Change Cipher Spec message-the device waits forever, wanting 5 more bytes. From what I Google'd, I need to change the cipher suite I'm using. How do I know which cipher the server doesn't like (so I can avoid that in future), and which one I should be using-there are scores of these available in the config file, though some of them clearly should not be used, as they are commented that way..
Jeff Thompson | Senior Electrical Engineer-Firmware
+1 704 752 6513 x1394
www.invue.com
[cid:image001.gif@01D64B9D.863E3220]
Much thanks to Manuel and Gilles for helping me get this far!
I'm trying to connect to endpoint hosted by Google for IoT devices. The handshake appears to progress through certificate verification and key exchange, encrypts a payload and then times out waiting for 5 expected bytes. I've attached the last part of the mbedTLS output generated with DEBUG_LEVEL 5 (the entrie thing is too big to include here). I'm sure the problem is either my code, network configuration, or somewhere else on my end. Can anyone give me a clue as to what might be wrong?
The starting point for attempting the connection is https_client_tls_xchg(), found in the attached snippet from the example httpsclient.c file as I've modified it.
FWIW, I'm using mbedTLS 2.13.1 running on an MIMXRT1062DVJ6A with MCUXpresso SDK 2.6.2. My HTTPS client is based on NXPs example project lwip_httpscli_mbedtls_freertos.
Thanks,
Jeff Thompson | Senior Electrical Engineer-Firmware
+1 704 752 6513 x1394
www.invue.com
[cid:image001.gif@01D64AE1.D6CB8F10]
[I assume you meant to reply to the list.]
If you don't have a filesystem, call mbedtls_x509_crt_parse instead of
mbedtls_x509_crt_parse_file.
To save static data size, you may want to store the data in binary form
instead of base64. To do this:
1. Split the PEM file into individual certificates.
2. Convert each file to DER (you can use programs/util/pem2der, but you
need to split the file first, because it only converts the first PEM chunk).
3. Convert each binary file to a C unsigned char array literal.
4. In your code, call mbedtls_x509_crt_parse_der in a loop over the array.
Your code might look something like this:
const uint8_t cert1_der[] = {0x30, …};
const uint8_t cert2_der[] = {0x30, …};
…
const struct {const uint8_t *data; size_t size;} root_certs_der = {
{cert1_der, sizeof(cert1_der)},
…
};
…
mbedtls_x509_crt roots;
mbedtls_x509_crt_init(&roots);
for (i = 0; i < sizeof(root_certs_der)/sizeof(root_certs_der[0]); i++)
mbedtls_x509_crt_parse_der(&roots, root_certs_der[i].data,
root_certs_der[i].size);
Best regards,
--
Gilles Peskine
Mbed TLS developer
On 23/06/2020 23:31, Thompson, Jeff wrote:
> I did see that function, but it assumes a file system, doesn't it? I'm not using one, and that would be a really big change to make this late in the development cycle, if I can avoid it. I can program the PEM file into flash memory, where it can be addressed, for reading only, just like ROM. Is there a way to use it like that?
>
> Jeff Thompson | Senior Electrical Engineer-Firmware
> +1 704 752 6513 x1394
> www.invue.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: mbed-tls <mbed-tls-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of Gilles Peskine via mbed-tls
> Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2020 4:38 PM
> To: mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
> Subject: Re: [mbed-tls] Working with a PEM file
>
> Hi Jeff,
>
> Don't modify or use the certificates in certs.c. The certificates in the certs module are only intended for testing and they will be moved from the library to the test code soon. They are never used automatically and should never be used outside of tests.
>
> The easiest way to set these root certificates is to pass the file to mbedtls_x509_crt_parse_file(). This gives you an object that represents the certificates and you can use those as the trusted CAs for certificate verification through the X.509 or TLS API.
>
> Your code might look like this (error checking and rest of the code
> omitted):
>
> mbedtls_x509_crt roots; // head of the list of trusted CAs mbedtls_x509_crt_init(&roots); mbedtls_x509_crt_parse_file(&roots, "roots.pem"); … // Verify that there is a chain of trust from a certificate to one of the trusted CAs mbedtls_x509_crt_verify(&crt_to_verify, &roots, NULL, NULL, &flags, NULL, NULL); … // Use the trusted CAs for a TLS connection mbedtls_ssl_conf_ca_chain(&ssl_config, roots, NULL); … // Once the certificates are no longer used anywhere mbedtls_x509_crt_free(&roots);
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> --
> Gilles Peskine
> Mbed TLS developer
>
> On 23/06/2020 21:38, Thompson, Jeff via mbed-tls wrote:
>> I’ve downloaded https://pki.goog/roots.pem and want to use the
>> certificates in it with mbedTLS. Is there some documentation that
>> tells me how to do this?
>>
>>
>>
>> The certs.c file only contains only a handful of certs, while the PEM
>> file has nearly 40. How do I know which one to use for what purpose?
>> The certs.c file has these certificate char[]’s:
>>
>>
>>
>> mbedtls_test_ca_crt_ec
>>
>> mbedtls_test_srv_crt_ec
>>
>> mbedtls_test_cli_crt_ec
>>
>> mbedtls_test_ca_crt_rsa
>>
>> mbedtls_test_ca_crt_rsa
>>
>> mbedtls_test_srv_crt_rsa
>>
>> mbedtls_test_cli_crt_rsa
>>
>>
>>
>> I’m reasonably sure I don’t need to replace mbedtls_test_cli_crt_ec
>> and mbedtls_test_cli_crt_rsa, since I am not using a client
>> certificate. But I’m not at all sure about whether I need to replace
>> the 3 **_ca_crt_** certs, the 2 **_srv_crt_** certs, or all 5. And, if
>> so, using which certs from the PEM file to replace which certs in
>> certs.c?. How do I figure out what to do here? I’ve never dealt with
>> cloud communication like this before, so please pardon my ignorance;
>> I’m eager to learn, but overwhelmed by so much that is new to me.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>>
>>
>> *Jeff Thompson* | Senior Electrical Engineer-Firmware
>> +1 704 752 6513 x1394
>> www.invue.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> mbed-tls mailing list
> mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
> https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/mbed-tls
Hi Jeff,
Don't modify or use the certificates in certs.c. The certificates in the
certs module are only intended for testing and they will be moved from
the library to the test code soon. They are never used automatically and
should never be used outside of tests.
The easiest way to set these root certificates is to pass the file to
mbedtls_x509_crt_parse_file(). This gives you an object that represents
the certificates and you can use those as the trusted CAs for
certificate verification through the X.509 or TLS API.
Your code might look like this (error checking and rest of the code
omitted):
mbedtls_x509_crt roots; // head of the list of trusted CAs
mbedtls_x509_crt_init(&roots);
mbedtls_x509_crt_parse_file(&roots, "roots.pem");
…
// Verify that there is a chain of trust from a certificate to one of
the trusted CAs
mbedtls_x509_crt_verify(&crt_to_verify, &roots, NULL, NULL, &flags,
NULL, NULL);
…
// Use the trusted CAs for a TLS connection
mbedtls_ssl_conf_ca_chain(&ssl_config, roots, NULL);
…
// Once the certificates are no longer used anywhere
mbedtls_x509_crt_free(&roots);
Best regards,
--
Gilles Peskine
Mbed TLS developer
On 23/06/2020 21:38, Thompson, Jeff via mbed-tls wrote:
>
> I’ve downloaded https://pki.goog/roots.pem and want to use the
> certificates in it with mbedTLS. Is there some documentation that
> tells me how to do this?
>
>
>
> The certs.c file only contains only a handful of certs, while the PEM
> file has nearly 40. How do I know which one to use for what purpose?
> The certs.c file has these certificate char[]’s:
>
>
>
> mbedtls_test_ca_crt_ec
>
> mbedtls_test_srv_crt_ec
>
> mbedtls_test_cli_crt_ec
>
> mbedtls_test_ca_crt_rsa
>
> mbedtls_test_ca_crt_rsa
>
> mbedtls_test_srv_crt_rsa
>
> mbedtls_test_cli_crt_rsa
>
>
>
> I’m reasonably sure I don’t need to replace mbedtls_test_cli_crt_ec
> and mbedtls_test_cli_crt_rsa, since I am not using a client
> certificate. But I’m not at all sure about whether I need to replace
> the 3 **_ca_crt_** certs, the 2 **_srv_crt_** certs, or all 5. And, if
> so, using which certs from the PEM file to replace which certs in
> certs.c?. How do I figure out what to do here? I’ve never dealt with
> cloud communication like this before, so please pardon my ignorance;
> I’m eager to learn, but overwhelmed by so much that is new to me.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> *Jeff Thompson* | Senior Electrical Engineer-Firmware
> +1 704 752 6513 x1394
> www.invue.com
>
>
>
>
I've downloaded https://pki.goog/roots.pem and want to use the certificates in it with mbedTLS. Is there some documentation that tells me how to do this?
The certs.c file only contains only a handful of certs, while the PEM file has nearly 40. How do I know which one to use for what purpose? The certs.c file has these certificate char[]'s:
mbedtls_test_ca_crt_ec
mbedtls_test_srv_crt_ec
mbedtls_test_cli_crt_ec
mbedtls_test_ca_crt_rsa
mbedtls_test_ca_crt_rsa
mbedtls_test_srv_crt_rsa
mbedtls_test_cli_crt_rsa
I'm reasonably sure I don't need to replace mbedtls_test_cli_crt_ec and mbedtls_test_cli_crt_rsa, since I am not using a client certificate. But I'm not at all sure about whether I need to replace the 3 *_ca_crt_* certs, the 2 *_srv_crt_* certs, or all 5. And, if so, using which certs from the PEM file to replace which certs in certs.c?. How do I figure out what to do here? I've never dealt with cloud communication like this before, so please pardon my ignorance; I'm eager to learn, but overwhelmed by so much that is new to me.
Thanks,
Jeff Thompson | Senior Electrical Engineer-Firmware
+1 704 752 6513 x1394
www.invue.com
[cid:image001.gif@01D64974.02162CD0]
Hi Jeff,
if you don't want to provision a client certificate in your TLS client, all you have to do is to not call `mbedtls_ssl_conf_own_cert()` in your client code. Then the library will send an empty certificate list as required by the standard.
Actually in the example code you have, if you look at the second and third argument in the call to `mbedtls_ssl_conf_own_cert()`, you should be able to remove all references to those arguments, and end up with a functional example without client certificates.
Also, you might want to have a look at this example from our source, which is a simple client without client-side certificates: https://github.com/ARMmbed/mbedtls/blob/development/programs/ssl/ssl_client…
Hope that helps,
Manuel.
________________________________
From: mbed-tls <mbed-tls-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> on behalf of Thompson, Jeff via mbed-tls <mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Sent: 22 June 2020 16:03
To: 'mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org' <mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Subject: [mbed-tls] Using mbed without a client certificate
I'm usiing:
#define MBEDTLS_VERSION_NUMBER 0x020D0100
#define MBEDTLS_VERSION_STRING "2.13.1"
#define MBEDTLS_VERSION_STRING_FULL "mbed TLS 2.13.1"
According to RFC5246:
If no suitable certificate is available,
the client MUST send a certificate message containing no
certificates. That is, the certificate_list structure has a
length of zero.
How do I do this with mbedTLS? The example code I have has certificates in it and calls mbedtls_x509_crt_parse(), which wants a list of certificates and will reject a zero-length list.
Jeff Thompson | Senior Electrical Engineer-Firmware
+1 704 752 6513 x1394
www.invue.com
[cid:image001.gif@01D64864.692FAD30]
Hi,
The packet size limitations can be accommodated by using the Maximum Fragment Length extension (https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6066#section-4, enabled by MBEDTLS_SSL_MAX_FRAGMENT_LENGTH
in Mbed TLS). In Mbed TLS this is only implemented for application data and DTLS handshake messages so far, and therefore you will need to use DTLS. Also the negotiation is driven by the client and it needs to be enabled both on the server and on the client.
(See the documentation of mbedtls_ssl_conf_max_frag_len() for more details.)
I hope that helps,
Janos
From: mbed-tls <mbed-tls-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> on behalf of "Fatima, Fariya via mbed-tls" <mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Reply to: "Fatima, Fariya" <Fariya.Fatima(a)Carrier.com>
Date: Tuesday, 23 June 2020 at 11:47
To: "mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org" <mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Subject: Re: [mbed-tls] BLE and Mbed TLS
Hi,
Can anyone help if mbedTLS TLS/DTLS code would work on top of BLE (specifically SPP). I am not sure if the packet size limitation on SPP would make TLS work.. any pointers anyone? Would be really helpful.
Regards,
Fariya
From: Fatima, Fariya
Sent: Monday, June 15, 2020 9:21 AM
To: 'mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org' <mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Subject: BLE and Mbed TLS
Hi,
I wanted to use TLS over BLE application. When I googled, I figured out that MbedTLS can work on BLE. If someone can share a sample application where-in MbedTLS APIs are used as part of a BT/BLE application, it will be of great help.
Regards,
Fariya
Hi,
Can anyone help if mbedTLS TLS/DTLS code would work on top of BLE (specifically SPP). I am not sure if the packet size limitation on SPP would make TLS work.. any pointers anyone? Would be really helpful.
Regards,
Fariya
From: Fatima, Fariya
Sent: Monday, June 15, 2020 9:21 AM
To: 'mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org' <mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Subject: BLE and Mbed TLS
Hi,
I wanted to use TLS over BLE application. When I googled, I figured out that MbedTLS can work on BLE. If someone can share a sample application where-in MbedTLS APIs are used as part of a BT/BLE application, it will be of great help.
Regards,
Fariya
Hi Oleksandr,
I understand you want to validate your implementation against the test vectors in the cited reference. It's obvious, but just in case my reply is read out of context some day, I want to emphasize: what I'm recommending below is for testing purposes only, importing a private key from a public reference must never be done in production.
In your situation the simplest way to proceed is probably to directly import the private and public key from the test vector to your ECDH context.
For example (assuming the data in the reference is big-endian, and omitting error checking for brevity):
static unsigned char private_a[32] = { 0x3f, 0x49, /* ... from the reference */ };
static unsigned char public_a[65] = {
0x04, /* this special value marks the start of an uncompressed public key */
0x20, 0xb0, /* ... (public A(x) from the reference) */
0xdc, 0x80, /* ... (public B(x) from the reference) */
};
static mbedtls_ecdh_context ctx_a;
mbedtls_ecdh_init(&ctx_a);
/* load the private/public key pair
* this replaces mbedtls_ecdh_gen_public() */
mbedtls_mpi_read_binary( &ctx_a->d, private_a, sizeof( private_a ) ); /* should check errors! */
mbedtls_ecp_point_read_binary( &ctx_a->Q, public_a, sizeof( public_a ) ); /* should check errors! */
Doing the same with ctx_b and then exchanging public keys and computing the shared secret as usual, you should obtain values that match the reference.
Again, this is only for validating against known test vectors. Importing a private key from a public reference must never be done in production.
Hope that helps,
Manuel.
________________________________
From: mbed-tls <mbed-tls-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> on behalf of Oleksandr Nychyporuk via mbed-tls <mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Sent: 22 June 2020 15:33
To: mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org <mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Subject: [mbed-tls] ECDH set custom private key
Hi,
I wanna configure the ECDH algorithm to repeat the following keys:
[image.png]
I was able to configure the algorithm, generate private and public keys on both: client and server sides. And it works as expected. The secret keys are equal on both sides.
But I did not manage to calculate the secret key that is on the picture. I do not know how to set these private keys. Could someone help me to do that?
Thanks,
I'm usiing:
#define MBEDTLS_VERSION_NUMBER 0x020D0100
#define MBEDTLS_VERSION_STRING "2.13.1"
#define MBEDTLS_VERSION_STRING_FULL "mbed TLS 2.13.1"
According to RFC5246:
If no suitable certificate is available,
the client MUST send a certificate message containing no
certificates. That is, the certificate_list structure has a
length of zero.
How do I do this with mbedTLS? The example code I have has certificates in it and calls mbedtls_x509_crt_parse(), which wants a list of certificates and will reject a zero-length list.
Jeff Thompson | Senior Electrical Engineer-Firmware
+1 704 752 6513 x1394
www.invue.com
[cid:image001.gif@01D64864.692FAD30]
Attaching the keys from the picture:
*7.1.2.1 P-256 Data Set 1*
*Private A*: 3f49f6d4 a3c55f38 74c9b3e3 d2103f50 4aff607b eb40b799 5899b8a6
cd3c1abd
*Private B*: 55188b3d 32f6bb9a 900afcfb eed4e72a 59cb9ac2 f19d7cfb 6b4fdd49
f47fc5fd
*Public A(x):* 20b003d2 f297be2c 5e2c83a7 e9f9a5b9 eff49111 acf4fddb
cc030148 0e359de6
*Public A(y)*: dc809c49 652aeb6d 63329abf 5a52155c 766345c2 8fed3024
741c8ed0 1589d28b
*Public B(x)*: 1ea1f0f0 1faf1d96 09592284 f19e4c00 47b58afd 8615a69f
559077b2 2faaa190
*Public B(y)*: 4c55f33e 429dad37 7356703a 9ab85160 472d1130 e28e3676
5f89aff9 15b1214a
*DHKey*: ec0234a3 57c8ad05 341010a6 0a397d9b 99796b13 b4f866f1 868d34f3
73bfa698
пн, 22 черв. 2020 о 16:33 <mbed-tls-request(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> пише:
> Send mbed-tls mailing list submissions to
> mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/mbed-tls
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> mbed-tls-request(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> mbed-tls-owner(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of mbed-tls digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. ECDH set custom private key (Oleksandr Nychyporuk)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2020 16:33:15 +0300
> From: Oleksandr Nychyporuk <olexandr.nychyporuk(a)gmail.com>
> To: mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
> Subject: [mbed-tls] ECDH set custom private key
> Message-ID:
> <CAAjyQQ4kQ8J-iVSV_yputKD83G9Aj65fYEWJ=
> ObPTeptXogghw(a)mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Hi,
>
> I wanna configure the ECDH algorithm to repeat the following keys:
> [image: image.png]
>
> I was able to configure the algorithm, generate private and public keys on
> both: client and server sides. And it works as expected. The secret keys
> are equal on both sides.
> But I did not manage to calculate the secret key that is on the picture. I
> do not know how to set these private keys. Could someone help me to do
> that?
>
> Thanks,
>
Hi,
I wanna configure the ECDH algorithm to repeat the following keys:
[image: image.png]
I was able to configure the algorithm, generate private and public keys on
both: client and server sides. And it works as expected. The secret keys
are equal on both sides.
But I did not manage to calculate the secret key that is on the picture. I
do not know how to set these private keys. Could someone help me to do that?
Thanks,
Hello,
I am trying to incorporate Mutual Authentication TLS in my hardware. For testing the mutual authentication in TLS, I setup a demo service which would request a client certificate in the TLS handshake. I used MS Edge, Google Chrome to test whether the service requests a client certificate during the TLS 1.2 handshake. When I ping the website, I do receive a request for a client certificate as shown in the image below. On selecting a certificate, I am able to access the website.
Link to the demo service: https://serviceforsomsecurity.azurewebsites.net/
[A screenshot of a cell phone Description automatically generated]
The above validates that the service requires the client to provide the client certificate during the TLS handshake.
Now, when I test this with the sample mbedTLS ssl_client2.c program: https://github.com/ARMmbed/mbedtls/blob/development/programs/ssl/ssl_client…, the client does not send a certificate at all.
The following are the steps that I carry out to test the TLS connection with my service with the sample mbedTLS ssl_client2.exe :
1. Open the mbedTLS.sln and build the ssl_client2 project. This creates a ssl_client2.exe under the Debug folder.
2. ssl_client2.exe server_name=serviceforsomsecurity.azurewebsites.net server_port=443 debug_level=3 auth_mode=required reconnect=1 crt_file=cert.pem key_file=key.pem ca_file=Digicert.cer force_version=tls1_2
The above command to test whether the client sends the client certificate during handshake. Here's the log:
[A screenshot of a computer Description automatically generated]
As you can see, in 3025 client receives: got no certificate request and then followed by server hello done at 3157. And then at 2080 & 2094, client skips writing certificate; during this handshake.
3. Then I tried including renegotiation flag:
ssl_client2.exe server_name=serviceforsomsecurity.azurewebsites.net server_port=443 debug_level=3 auth_mode=required reconnect=1 crt_file=cert.pem key_file=key.pem ca_file=Digicert.cer force_version=tls1_2 renegotiate=1
Even in this case, the client does not get the certificate and abruptly ends during renegotiation due to timeout.
I have included both the log files below for complete handshake review. [ssl_client_without_renegotiation.txt and ssl_client_with_renegotiation.txt]
Can you please let me know how to debug this client certificate problem? It will be really a great help!
Million thanks in advance.
Regards,
Abhilash
Hello Sir/Madam,
I work in Espressif Systems. I am currently working on providing an alternate hardware RSA sign implementation for mbedtls software sign for Espressif's new chip ESP32S2. I have gone through mbedTLS API in detail but I dont see any option where I can only replace mbedTLS software sign function with our hardware sign function .
I have gone through the issue https://tls.mbed.org/discussions/generic/using-an-external-rsa-private-key I have seen that there is a function named `mbedtls_pk_setup_rsa_alt` where we only register private key related function to the ALT_CTX which mbedtls uses to perform RSA sign. but this is not supported for TLS connections.
I have seen that there is MBEDTLS_RSA_ALT option in mbedTLS where we can provide alternate function to many of mbedTLS API, but we do not want to change any of the other functions, just provide alternate implementation of hardware sign. If we go with this way, there will be lot of duplicate code which will be needed to be maintained.
can mbedTLS provide option to use mbedtls_rsa_alt context in its file `pkparse.c` so as to allow rsa sign using an extrnal private key.
Thanks and Regards,
Aditya
P.S. - I raised the same issue yesterday, my issue was rejected stating I have not subscribed to the mailing-list. But I had already done that. I tried to subscribe again and it also said you are already subscribed.
These defines are needed when the platform doesn’t have standard functions like `calloc()` and `free()`. (You can find more details on the macros in `config.h`.)
Regards,
Janos
From: mbed-tls <mbed-tls-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> on behalf of songwei fu via mbed-tls <mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Reply to: "songwei.fu(a)web.de" <songwei.fu(a)web.de>
Date: Wednesday, 17 June 2020 at 13:41
To: "Kaul, Martin" <Martin.Kaul(a)leuze.com>
Cc: "mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org" <mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Subject: Re: [mbed-tls] Link error when calling "altcp_tls_create_config_client"
Thanks Martin.
It solved my problem! By adding $(CHIBIOS)/os/various/syscalls.c in the makefile and removing following defines, the linker error is gone.
#define MBEDTLS_PLATFORM_C
#define MBEDTLS_PLATFORM_MEMORY
#define MBEDTLS_PLATFORM_CALLOC_MACRO chHeapAlloc
#define MBEDTLS_PLATFORM_FREE_MACRO chHeapFree
Now I wonder when these defines are needed? I thought I need to port them to the OS-specific memory allocation. like in freeRTOS, it would be "pvPortCalloc", and for chibios it would be chHeapAlloc. Anybody can give me some hint?
-- Songwei
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 17. Juni 2020 um 12:12 Uhr
Von: "Kaul, Martin" <Martin.Kaul(a)leuze.com>
An: "songwei.fu(a)web.de" <songwei.fu(a)web.de>
Betreff: AW: [mbed-tls] Link error when calling "altcp_tls_create_config_client"
Hi,
_sbrk is need when you using heap memory, for example using malloc() – see following discussion in stackoverflow: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/32446814/undefined-reference-to-sbrk-in…
Maybe that helps.
Best regards
Martin
Von: mbed-tls [mailto:mbed-tls-bounces@lists.trustedfirmware.org] Im Auftrag von songwei fu via mbed-tls
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 17. Juni 2020 11:49
An: mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Betreff: [mbed-tls] Link error when calling "altcp_tls_create_config_client"
Hi guys,
I am new to the list and also to mbedTLS. Now I am trying to port mbedTLS to chibiOS. And when I called altcp_tls_create_config_client(cert, sizeof(cert)), I got a link error like following:
c:/chibistudio/tools/gnu tools arm embedded/7.0 2017q4/bin/../lib/gcc/arm-none-eabi/7.2.1/../../../../arm-none-eabi/lib/thumb/v7e-m\libg.a(lib_a-sbrkr.o): In function `_sbrk_r':
sbrkr.c:(.text._sbrk_r+0xc): undefined reference to `_sbrk'
And these are my settings:
#define MBEDTLS_PLATFORM_C
#define MBEDTLS_PLATFORM_MEMORY
#define MBEDTLS_PLATFORM_CALLOC_MACRO chHeapAlloc
#define MBEDTLS_PLATFORM_FREE_MACRO chHeapFree
where chHeapAlloc and chHeapFree are the memory allocation functions from chibios.
(1) Did I miss some settings? or i did something wrong?
(2) I did not find much information about the porting from chibios side. Does anybody know where I can look for reference projects/docs?
Any suggestion will be appreciated. Thanks.
Songwei
Hi Songwei,
Welcome to the list and thank you for your interest in Mbed TLS!
I found a similar issue on stack overflow:
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/28895703/sbrk-function-not-found-when-p…
Is this the same issue as yours?
Regards,
Janos
From: mbed-tls <mbed-tls-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> on behalf of songwei fu via mbed-tls <mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Reply to: "songwei.fu(a)web.de" <songwei.fu(a)web.de>
Date: Wednesday, 17 June 2020 at 10:49
To: "mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org" <mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Subject: [mbed-tls] Link error when calling "altcp_tls_create_config_client"
Hi guys,
I am new to the list and also to mbedTLS. Now I am trying to port mbedTLS to chibiOS. And when I called altcp_tls_create_config_client(cert, sizeof(cert)), I got a link error like following:
c:/chibistudio/tools/gnu tools arm embedded/7.0 2017q4/bin/../lib/gcc/arm-none-eabi/7.2.1/../../../../arm-none-eabi/lib/thumb/v7e-m\libg.a(lib_a-sbrkr.o): In function `_sbrk_r':
sbrkr.c:(.text._sbrk_r+0xc): undefined reference to `_sbrk'
And these are my settings:
#define MBEDTLS_PLATFORM_C
#define MBEDTLS_PLATFORM_MEMORY
#define MBEDTLS_PLATFORM_CALLOC_MACRO chHeapAlloc
#define MBEDTLS_PLATFORM_FREE_MACRO chHeapFree
where chHeapAlloc and chHeapFree are the memory allocation functions from chibios.
(1) Did I miss some settings? or i did something wrong?
(2) I did not find much information about the porting from chibios side. Does anybody know where I can look for reference projects/docs?
Any suggestion will be appreciated. Thanks.
Songwei
Hi All,
I am working on Renesas RZA2M embedded board with Linux. It has limited memory of 6MB flash(R-Only)
I am using mbedtls version 2.16.5 for aws iot sdk for embedded c according to
https://docs.aws.amazon.com/iot/latest/developerguide/iot-embedded-c-sdk.ht…
When I run sample application, it is taking 15 secs for "Seeding random generator number..." and throwing below error
$ ./subscribe_publish_sample
AWS IoT SDK Version 3.0.1-
DEBUG: main L#159 rootCA /root/../certs/AmazonRootCA1.pem
DEBUG: main L#160 clientCRT /root/../certs/774a17950a-certificate.pem.crt
DEBUG: main L#161 clientKey /root/../certs/774a17950a-private.pem.key
Connecting...
DEBUG: iot_tls_connect L#130
. Seeding the random number generator...
DEBUG: iot_tls_connect L#138 . Loading the CA root certificate ...
DEBUG: iot_tls_connect L#144 ok (0 skipped)
DEBUG: iot_tls_connect L#146 . Loading the client cert. and key...
DEBUG: iot_tls_connect L#159 ok
DEBUG: iot_tls_connect L#161 . Connecting to a2g7twmqo7hg82-ats.iot.ap-south-1.amazonaws.com/443...
DEBUG: iot_tls_connect L#180 ok
DEBUG: iot_tls_connect L#182 . Setting up the SSL/TLS structure...
DEBUG: iot_tls_connect L#223
SSL state connect : 0
DEBUG: iot_tls_connect L#226 ok
DEBUG: iot_tls_connect L#228
SSL state connect : 0
DEBUG: iot_tls_connect L#229 . Performing the SSL/TLS handshake...
ERROR: iot_tls_connect L#232 failed
! mbedtls_ssl_handshake returned -0x50
ERROR: main L#190 Error(-4) connecting to a2g7twmqo7hg82-ats.iot.ap-south-1.amazonaws.com:443
For detailed debug log using ssl_client2, go through https://pastebin.com/mNXhB0xj<https://github.com/ARMmbed/mbedtls/issues/url>
https://pastebin.com/mNXhB0xj
my client device specifications
$ cat /proc/cpuinfo
processor : 0
model name : ARMv7 Processor rev 1 (v7l)
BogoMIPS : 1056.00
Features : half thumb fastmult vfp edsp neon vfpv3 tls vfpd32
CPU implementer : 0x41
CPU architecture: 7
CPU variant : 0x4
CPU part : 0xc09
CPU revision : 1
Hardware : Generic R7S9210 (Flattened Device Tree)
Revision : 0000
Serial : 0000000000000000
$ free
total used free shared buffers cached
Mem: 7544 4484 3060 40 0 304
-/+ buffers/cache: 4180 3364
Swap: 0 0 0
I am not getting any help to resolve this issue and spending days and days. I am suspecting the issue might be timing related (or) cpu clock related (or) memory footprint related (or) something else
I need this forum help badly to resolve the issue. Please ping me if you need any other data.
Thanks in advance,
Srinivas.
Regards,
Srinivas.
[cid:1eddf249-06f8-4cbd-a3e2-9c22437fd27f]
Hi,
I wanted to use TLS over BLE application. When I googled, I figured out that MbedTLS can work on BLE. If someone can share a sample application where-in MbedTLS APIs are used as part of a BT/BLE application, it will be of great help.
Regards,
Fariya
Hi,
we have an application which uses ASIO. And now we want to add mbed TLS to
provide a TLS layer.
ASIO can be used with OpenSSL and wolfSSL. But how to do this with mbed TLS?
Any hints on that?
See also this question at SO:
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/61875404/asio-c-with-mbed-tls-library
best regards,
Frank
I want to connect an ESP32 to a DTLS server using mbedtls' dtls_server demo. The code I used for the client is very similar to the dtls_client example, but is unable to finish the handshake process for some reason. According to Wireshark, the client is not responding to the "Server hello done" frame, causing a timeout that makes the server to send the certificate again and again until it gives up the connection. The dtls_client demo works correctly on the computer, but not on the ESP32. Has anyone tested DTLS on the ESP32?
I have attached the following files for further reference:
- dtls_esp32.pcapng: Wireshark file with the DTLS packets between client and server.
- mbedtls.tar.bz2: compressed (> 7k lines) plain text log as reported by the board. On line 7131, where the last message from the server is received, it looks like the client never receives the whole message, so it never reaches the "Server hello done" state. Could anyone please confirm this?
- dtls.c: client source code. Slightly modified from the dtls_client example.
Thank you very much for your help.
Xavi