do not include subject key identifier in leaf certificates #6549
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
mhils
force-pushed
the
to-ski-or-not-to-ski
branch
2 times, most recently
from
c0b6474
to
731cec5
Compare
This fixes mitmproxy#6494: if CA and leaf share the same SKI, SChannel gets confused. Co-authored-by: Andrius Andrikonis <andrius.andrikonis@toughlex.com>
mhils
force-pushed
the
to-ski-or-not-to-ski
branch
from
731cec5
to
32e3c0d
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This fixes #6494: if CA and leaf share the same Subject Key Identifier, SChannel gets confused. So we just skip the SKI for leafs, which is still fine with OpenSSL 3.x (this was previously fixed by @mmaxim) and RFC 5280.
@driuba did the hard work of nailing down the issue, this here is a slightly simpler (and more performant) fix for the problem.
closes #6546