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

sip_transport_tls: Allow wildcard certifcates #3114

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

kharwell
Copy link

Rightly the use of wildcards in certificates is disallowed in accordance
with RFC5922. However, RFC2818 does make some allowances with regards to
their use when using subject alt names with DNS name types.

As such this patch creates a new setting for TLS transports called
'allow_wildcard_certs', which when enabled allows DNS name types, as
well as the common name that start with '*.' to match as a wildcard.

For instance: *.example.com
will match for: foo.example.com

Partial matching is not allowed, e.g. f*.example.com, foo.*.com, etc...
And the starting wildcard only matches for a single levels

For instance: *.example.com
will NOT match for: foo.bar.example.com

The new setting is disabled by default.

Rightly the use of wildcards in certificates is disallowed in accordance
with RFC5922. However, RFC2818 does make some allowances with regards to
their use when using subject alt names with DNS name types.

As such this patch creates a new setting for TLS transports called
'allow_wildcard_certs', which when enabled allows DNS name types, as
well as the common name that start with '*.' to match as a wildcard.

For instance: *.example.com
will match for: foo.example.com

Partial matching is not allowed, e.g. f*.example.com, foo.*.com, etc...
And the starting wildcard only matches for a single levels

For instance: *.example.com
will NOT match for: foo.bar.example.com

The new setting is disabled by default.
@CLAassistant
Copy link

CLAassistant commented May 19, 2022

CLA assistant check
All committers have signed the CLA.

@kharwell
Copy link
Author

Ended up handling this in our code via the connected state callback.

close 3113

@kharwell kharwell closed this May 26, 2022
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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants