Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Incubator Q&A

Welcome to the staging ground for new communities! Each proposal has a description in the "Descriptions" category and a body of questions and answers in "Incubator Q&A". You can ask questions (and get answers, we hope!) right away, and start new proposals.

What happens to TLS name constraints when the client does not support them? Question

+2
−0

I only have a working knowledge of TLS.

TLS today supports name constraints, to restrict which domains a CA can issue certs for: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5280#section-4.2.1.10

I've seen people claim that certain software doesn't support this feature: https://serverfault.com/questions/670725/is-it-possible-to-restrict-the-use-of-a-root-certificate-to-a-domain/764699#comment1029498_764699 I think that NCs were not always part of the standard, or at least not always commonly used in the past, so it would not surprise me if there's legacy software out there that pretends they don't exist.

Suppose that:

  1. User navigates to https://example.com
  2. Host presents TLS cert signed by Acme Root CA
  3. User has Acme Root CA installed
  4. However, the installed cert has a name constraint that does not allow it to sign example.com
  5. The user's program does not have proper support for name constraints

What will happen? Will the cert be refused or accepted?

I understand it's not possible for answers to have comprehensive knowledge of every TLS misimplementation out there. I am asking:

  • What is the logical way to future proof TLS code against future features like NCs?
  • What is common practice for TLS devs dealing with possible future features?
  • Does TLS itself have any built-in mechanism for handling new features that did not exist when a given client was developed?

Basically, what I'm trying to understand is: When I use NCs, is legacy or poorly developed software very vulnerable because they did not explicitly handle NCs, or will it probably fail gracefully?

History
Why does this post require moderator attention?
You might want to add some details to your flag.
Why should this post be closed?

0 comment threads

1 answer

+3
−0

If both the CA and the client software follow the RFC, the client software will refuse the cert.

Section 4.2 (Certificate Extensions) of the RFC you link states

... Each extension in a certificate is designated as either critical or non-critical. A certificate-using system MUST reject the certificate if it encounters a critical extension it does not recognize or a critical extension that contains information that it cannot process. A non-critical extension MAY be ignored if it is not recognized, but MUST be processed if it is recognized. ...

And section 4.2.1.10 (Name Constraints) states

... Conforming CAs MUST mark this extension as critical ...

History
Why does this post require moderator attention?
You might want to add some details to your flag.

0 comment threads

Sign up to answer this question »