I was dubious about it to begin with, when I found that RFC 7616's
example seemed to be treating it as a 256-bit truncation of SHA-512,
and not the thing FIPS 180-4 section 6.7 specifies as "SHA-512/256"
(which also changes the initial hash state). Having failed to get a
clarifying response from the RFC authors, I had the idea this morning
of testing other HTTP clients to see what _they_ thought that hash
function meant, and then at least I could go with an existing
in-practice consensus.
There is no in-practice consensus. Firefox doesn't support that
algorithm at all (but they do support SHA-256); wget doesn't support
anything that RFC 7616 added to the original RFC 2617. But the prize
for weirdness goes to curl, which does accept the name "SHA-512-256"
and ... treats it as an alias for SHA-256!
So I think the situation among real clients is too confusing to even
try to work with, and I'm going to stop adding to it. PuTTY will
follow Firefox's policy: if a proxy server asks for SHA-256 digests
we'll happily provide them, but if they ask for SHA-512-256 we'll
refuse on the grounds that it's not clear enough what it means.
In http.c, this drops in reasonably neatly alongside the existing
support for Basic, now that we're waiting for an initial 407 response
from the proxy to tell us which auth mechanism it would prefer to use.
The rest of this patch is mostly contriving to add testcrypt support
for the function in cproxy.c that generates the complicated output
header to go in the HTTP request: you need about a dozen assorted
parameters, the actual response hash has two more hashes in its
preimage, and there's even an option to hash the username as well if
necessary. Much more complicated than CHAP (which is just plain
HMAC-MD5), so it needs testing!
Happily, RFC 7616 comes with some reasonably useful test cases, and
I've managed to transcribe them directly into cryptsuite.py and
demonstrate that my response-generator agrees with them.
End-to-end testing of the whole system was done against Squid 4.13
(specifically, the squid package in Debian bullseye, version 4.13-10).
Previously, the proxy negotiation functions were written as explicit
state machines, with ps->state being manually set to a sequence of
positive integer values which would be tested by if statements in the
next call to the same negotiation function.
That's not how this code base likes to do things! We have a coroutine
system to allow those state machines to be implicit rather than
explicit, so that we can use ordinary control flow statements like
while loops. Reorganised each proxy negotiation function into a
coroutine-based system like that.
While I'm at it, I've also moved each proxy negotiator out into its
own source file, to make proxy.c less overcrowded and monolithic. And
_that_ gave me the opportunity to define each negotiator as an
implementation of a trait rather than as a single function - which
means now each one can define its own local variables and have its own
cleanup function, instead of all of them having to share the variables
inside the main ProxySocket struct.
In the new coroutine system, negotiators don't have to worry about the
mechanics of actually sending data down the underlying Socket any
more. The negotiator coroutine just appends to a bufchain (via a
provided bufchain_sink), and after every call to the coroutine,
central code in proxy.c transfers the data to the Socket itself. This
avoids a lot of intermediate allocations within the negotiators, which
previously kept having to make temporary strbufs or arrays in order to
have something to point an sk_write() at; now they can just put
formatted data directly into the output bufchain via the marshal.h
interface.
In this version of the code, I've also moved most of the SOCKS5 CHAP
implementation from cproxy.c into socks5.c, so that it can sit in the
same coroutine as the rest of the proxy negotiation control flow.
That's because calling a sub-coroutine (co-subroutine?) is awkward to
set up (though it is _possible_ - we do SSH-2 kex that way), and
there's no real need to bother in this case, since the only thing that
really needs to go in cproxy.c is the actual cryptography plus a flag
to tell socks5.c whether to offer CHAP authentication in the first
place.
This seemed like a worthwhile cleanup to do while I was working on
this code anyway. Now all the magic numbers are defined in a header
file by macro names indicating their meaning, and used by both the
SOCKS client code in the proxy subdirectory and the SOCKS server code
in portfwd.c.
It's variously 'ps' and 'p' in functions that already receive one, and
it's 'ret' in the main function that initially constructs one. Let's
call it 'ps' consistently, so that the code idioms are the same
everywhere.
Having a single plug_closing() function covering various kinds of
closure is reasonably convenient from the point of view of Plug
implementations, but it's annoying for callers, who all have to fill
in pointless NULL and 0 parameters in the cases where they're not
used.
Added some inline helper functions in network.h alongside the main
plug_closing() dispatch wrappers, so that each kind of connection
closure can present a separate API for the Socket side of the
interface, without complicating the vtable for the Plug side.
Also, added OS-specific extra helpers in the Unix and Windows
directories, which centralise the job of taking an OS error code (of
whatever kind) and translating it into its error message.
In passing, this removes the horrible ad-hoc made-up error codes in
proxy.h, which is OK, because nothing checked for them anyway, and
also I'm about to do an API change to plug_closing proper that removes
the need for them.
There are quite a few of them already, and I'm about to make another
one, so let's start with a bit of tidying up.
The CMake build organisation is unchanged: I haven't put the proxy
object files into a separate library, just moved the locations of the
source files. (Organising proxying as a library would be tricky
anyway, because of the various overrides for tools that want to avoid
cryptography.)
