[release/7.0] fix TLS resume with client certificates on Linux

[wfurt]

partial backport of #79898
fixes #79869

Customer Impact

because of the TLS resume, customer can see unexpected dependencies and incorrect behavior when using client certificates on Linux. The TLS cache in in process memory so the impact is limited.

Testing

New tests were added to cover the scenarios.
The tests depend on IsMutuallyAuthenticated property that may be incorrect because of #65563.
Since we do not port fix for that I made tests Linux specific for the release branch. (there is no resume on macOS)
(the tests added in main also discover gaps so the product change #79898 had more fixes for Window)

Regression

yes, new in 7.0

Risk Low

We did not do TLS resume at all prior 7.0 on Linux. This change brings back the behavior in one more case we missed.

[ghost]

Tagging subscribers to this area: @dotnet/ncl, @vcsjones
See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.

Issue Details

---

partial backport of #79898
fixes #79869

Customer Impact

because of the TLS resume, customer can see unexpected dependencies and incorrect behavior when using client certificates on Linux. The TLS cache in in process memory so the impact is limited.

Testing

New tests were added to cover the scenarios.
The tests depend on IsMutuallyAuthenticated property that may be incorrect because of #65563.
Since we do not port fix for that I made tests Linux specific for the release branch. (there is no resume on macOS)
(the tests added in main also discover gaps so the product change #79898 had more fixes for Window)

Regression

yes, new in 7.0

Risk Low

We did not do TLS resume at all prior 7.0 on Linux. This change brings back the behavior in one more case we missed.

Author:	wfurt
Assignees:	wfurt
Labels:	Servicing-consider, area-System.Net.Security, os-linux
Milestone:	-

[karelz]

Tactics approval via email by @SteveMCarroll on Wed 2/8.
Marking it servicing-approved.

[karelz]

@rzikm can you please help look at the test failures and link them to known issues? @carlossanlop will have easier time to merge it later. Thank you!

[rzikm]

First one is Helix API does not contain an entry for Windows.10.Arm64.Open, did we remove this queue from CI? @MattGal Do you have some idea what is going on?

The other one is Microsoft.VisualBasic.Core.Tests, which looks like #81544

[karelz]

Looks like we are clean on test results, so we should be ready to merge when suitable - @carlossanlop let us know if we missed anything. Thanks!

[MattGal]

First one is Helix API does not contain an entry for Windows.10.Arm64.Open, did we remove this queue from CI? @MattGal Do you have some idea what is going on?

The other one is Microsoft.VisualBasic.Core.Tests, which looks like #81544

Yes, aside from the warnings that appear in logging (example):

##[warning]SENDHELIXJOB(0,0): warning : Helix queue windows.10.arm64.open was set for estimated removal date of 2023-02-01. In most cases the queue will be removed permanently due to end-of-life; please contact dnceng for any questions or concerns, and we can help you decide how to proceed and discuss other options.

there is also a DL called "dncpartners" where this removal was communicated many weeks out from the actual removal. We've moved to Azure-based VMs, please use windows.11.arm64 and windows.11.arm64.open instead.

[carlossanlop]

Approved by Tactics for 7.0.4.
Signed off by area owner.
CI failures are unrelated - I merged the fix for the update to Win10 helix queues yesterday, but after this PR was created (hence the failure).
No OOB changes needed for System.Net.Security.
Ready to merge.

[wfurt]

thanks everyone.