Remove extraneous certificate from OCSP response #20201
Merged
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
Since the issuer used to sign the certificate also signs the OCSP response, no additional information is added by sending the issuer again in the certs field of the BasicOCSPResponse structure. Removing it saves bytes and avoids confusing Go-based OCSP verifiers which cannot handle the cert issuer being duplicated in the certs field. Signed-off-by: Alexander Scheel <alex.scheel@hashicorp.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexander Scheel <alex.scheel@hashicorp.com>
stevendpclark
approved these changes
Apr 17, 2023
This was referenced Apr 17, 2023
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Since the issuer used to sign the certificate also signs the OCSP response, no additional information is added by sending the issuer again in the
certsfield of theBasicOCSPResponsestructure. Removing it saves bytes and avoids confusing Go-based OCSP verifiers which cannot handle the cert issuer being duplicated in thecertsfield.This complements #20181; if anyone uses a different cluster for Vault PKI from Cert Auth and are running Vault 1.12.x, they could update that cluster to a future 1.12 Vault release, instead of (or in addition to) updating the cluster running Cert Auth to a newer 1.13 version. This additionally improves compatibility with any other Go OCSP validation that may be occurring (e.g., Snowflake or others as reported on the upstream Go issue).
As another justification, note that when validating under cross-signed pairs, if we provision this certificate without including both cross-signed pairs, we're essentially gambling as to which one the (OCSP) client is validating under since they're otherwise equivalent.