Libraries for crypto and SSL/TLS protocols

Edit Package mbedtls
https://tls.mbed.org

mbedtls implements the SSL3, TLS 1.0, 1.1 and 1.2 protocols. It
supports a number of extensions such as SSL Session Tickets (RFC
5077), Server Name Indication (SNI) (RFC 6066), Truncated HMAC (RFC
6066), Max Fragment Length (RFC 6066), Secure Renegotiation (RFC
5746) and Application Layer Protocol Negotiation (ALPN). It
understands the RSA, (EC)DH(E)-RSA, (EC)DH(E)-PSK and RSA-PSK key
exchanges.

Refresh
Refresh
Source Files
Filename Size Changed
project.diff 0000003236 3.16 KB
v2.25.0.tar.gz 0003994316 3.81 MB
Revision 22 (latest revision is 52)
Martin Pluskal's avatar Martin Pluskal (pluskalm) accepted request 858114 from Dirk Mueller's avatar Dirk Mueller (dirkmueller) (revision 22)
- update to 2.25.0:
  * This release of Mbed TLS provides bug fixes, minor enhancements and new
  features. This release includes fixes for security issues. 
  * see https://github.com/ARMmbed/mbedtls/releases/tag/v2.25.0
  * The functions mbedtls_cipher_auth_encrypt() and
  mbedtls_cipher_auth_decrypt() would write past the minimum documented size
  of the output buffer when used with NIST_KW. As a result, code using those
  functions as documented with NIST_KW could have a buffer overwrite of up to
  15 bytes, with consequences ranging up to arbitrary code execution
  depending on the location of the output buffer.
  * Limit the size of calculations performed by mbedtls_mpi_exp_mod to
  MBEDTLS_MPI_MAX_SIZE to prevent a potential denial of service when generating
  Diffie-Hellman key pairs. Credit to OSS-Fuzz.
  
  * A failure of the random generator was ignored in mbedtls_mpi_fill_random(),
  which is how most uses of randomization in asymmetric cryptography (including
  key generation, intermediate value randomization and blinding) are implemented.
  This could cause failures or the silent use of non-random values. A random
  generator can fail if it needs reseeding and cannot not obtain entropy, or due
  to an internal failure (which, for Mbed TLS's own CTR_DRBG or HMAC_DRBG, can
  only happen due to a misconfiguration).
  
  * Fix a compliance issue whereby we were not checking the tag on the algorithm
  parameters (only the size) when comparing the signature in the description part
  of the cert to the real signature. This meant that a NULL algorithm parameters
  entry would look identical to an array of REAL (size zero) to the library and
  thus the certificate would be considered valid. However, if the parameters do
  not match in any way then the certificate should be considered invalid, and
  indeed OpenSSL marks these certs as invalid when mbedtls did not. Many thanks
  to guidovranken who found this issue via differential fuzzing and reported it
Comments 0
openSUSE Build Service is sponsored by