Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

unbound: silently skips TLS certificate validation #6717

Closed
jorti opened this issue Aug 8, 2018 · 3 comments
Closed

unbound: silently skips TLS certificate validation #6717

jorti opened this issue Aug 8, 2018 · 3 comments

Comments

@jorti
Copy link

jorti commented Aug 8, 2018

Maintainer: @EricLuehrsen
Environment: x86_64 KVM virtual machine, OpenWrt 18.06.0

Versions:
unbound - 1.7.3-2
libopenssl - 1.0.2o-1

Description:
Unbound silently skips TLS certificate validation. It continues to resolve happily after configuring it like this:

server:
    tls-cert-bundle: "/etc/ssl/certs/ca-certificates.crt"

forward-zone:
    name: "."
    forward-ssl-upstream: yes
    forward-addr: 1.1.1.1@853#bad-hostname.com
    forward-addr: 1.0.0.1@853#bad-hostname.com

In this upstream bug report can be seen that OpenSSL 1.1.x is needed for this feature to work.

https://www.nlnetlabs.nl/bugs-script/show_bug.cgi?id=658#c15

If upgrading to OpenSSL 1.1.x is not yet possible, please, at least include the patch mentioned in that bug to warn the user that the name verification functionality is not available.

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Aug 9, 2018

It would be sort of detrimental to the TLS concept if the TLS certificates of the upstream resolver(s) are not being validated and thus leaving the connection open to MitM attacks/eavesdropping.

Seems like OpenSSH is blocking OpenSSL 1.1.x openwrt/openwrt#965

@EricLuehrsen
Copy link
Contributor

This same situation existed when HTTPS was rolling out and it wasn't completely anchored everywhere. One argument was half-security was better than none, or the proverbial, locks help keep honest people honest. Pirates may MiM. ISP could be a higher risk for privacy leaks. An ISP could argue they just so happened to observe plain text communications, and they just so happened to share it with marketing partners. However encrypted communications have a presumption of privacy, and spoofing a domain and certificate pair is using a trademark without license... something like that.

@dibdot
Copy link
Contributor

dibdot commented Aug 10, 2018

fixed in trunk

@dibdot dibdot closed this as completed Aug 10, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants