[Swan] Question/troubleshooting x509 w/ intermediate & root CA

[Bryan Harris]

Hi Paul,

I have continued to go through, one thing I tried to fix (but I'm not sure
if correctly) was what appears to be a name constraints issue.  I noticed
in the example configuration they have the root CA and the sub CA name
constraints like this:

[name_constraints]
permitted;DNS.0=example.com
permitted;DNS.1=example.org
excluded;IP.0=0.0.0.0/0.0.0.0
excluded;IP.1=0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0/0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0

I thought, perhaps this is causing the message about "The Certifying
Authority for this certificate is not permitted to issue a certificate with
this name."  So I just commented those lines like so:

[name_constraints]
# permitted;DNS.0=example.com
# permitted;DNS.1=example.org
excluded;IP.0=0.0.0.0/0.0.0.0
excluded;IP.1=0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0/0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0

Now I have regenerated the Sub CA from the Root CA, then regenerated the
right and left certificates.  I thought perhaps now I would not get the
message.  But now I'm getting a message like so:

Sep 26 10:24:01 right pluto[4250]: | Certificate CN=Sub CA,O=Example,C=GB
failed verification : security library: invalid arguments.
Sep 26 10:24:01 right pluto[4250]: |   trusted_ca_nss called with a=(empty)
b=(empty)
Sep 26 10:24:01 right pluto[4250]: "mytunnel" #1: no RSA public key known
for 'C=GB, O=Example, CN=left'
Sep 26 10:24:01 right pluto[4250]: "mytunnel" #1: sending encrypted
notification INVALID_KEY_INFORMATION to 192.168.122.7:500

Is it possible that I need to regenerate the root CA as well as the Sub CA
and the left/right certificates?  The root CA does not even have the name
constraints in it, so I thought it would be unnecessary.  But I wonder if I
just need to start over.

V/r,
Bryan

On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 7:22 AM, Bryan Harris <bryanlharris at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi Paul,
>
> Any idea why the remote endpoint certificate is not able to come over
> IKE?  Here are the most relevant-looking lines from the logs, but I do not
> understand.  Is it possible that since I have specified the CRL that is
> needed to be available?  I thought without strictcrlpolicy (which I do not
> set) then it would be okay.
>
> But I can't figure out where it's going wrong or why.  I do not ever seem
> to get the remote certificate pulled in from either side.
>
> I also notice it says "The Certifying Authority for this certificate is
> not permitted to issue a certificate with this name."  Why does it think my
> CA is not permitted to issue a certificate for its own name, or for
> itself?  I'm a little confused on that one, and I wonder if that may be the
> reason the thing doesn't work.
>
> Sep 23 13:30:08 right pluto[16936]: | get_issuer_crl : looking for a CRL
> issued by CN=Sub CA,O=Example,C=GB
> Sep 23 13:30:08 right pluto[16936]: | missing or expired CRL
> Sep 23 13:30:08 right pluto[16936]: | crl_strict: 0, ocsp: 0, ocsp_strict:
> 0
> Sep 23 13:30:08 right pluto[16936]: | Certificate CN=Root
> CA,O=Example,C=GB failed verification : The Certifying Authority for this
> certificate is not permitted to issue a certificate with this name.
> Sep 23 13:30:08 right pluto[16936]: |   trusted_ca_nss called with
> a=(empty) b=(empty)
> Sep 23 13:30:08 right pluto[16936]: "mytunnel" #2: EXPECTATION FAILED at
> /builddir/build/BUILD/libreswan-3.15/programs/pluto/ikev1.c:2843: r !=
> NULL
> Sep 23 13:30:08 right pluto[16936]: "mytunnel" #2: no suitable connection
> for peer 'C=GB, O=Example, CN=left'
> Sep 23 13:30:08 right pluto[16936]: "mytunnel" #2: sending encrypted
> notification INVALID_ID_INFORMATION to 192.168.122.7:500
>
> V/r,
> Bryan
>
> On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 12:33 AM, Paul Wouters <paul at nohats.ca> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 23 Sep 2016, Bryan Harris wrote:
>>
>> Welp, I got to playing around with the old certs that were working, and I
>>> somehow broke them.  Then I went back
>>> through everything and noticed I had to change the trust bits.
>>>
>>> So these trust bits work:
>>>
>>> "CT,,"
>>>
>>
>> Yes, you need the trust bits set properly. Libreswan does that on
>> startup using the "ipsec checknss" command (as part of the service
>> startup). Older versions did not do this.
>>
>>
>> And I can't recall where I found the documentation for these, but I had
>>> read it at some point.  But the NEW certs
>>> import properly in the first place, so there is not a need (I thought)
>>> to set any trust bits (the new ones look like
>>> "CT,," so I left it alone).
>>>
>>
>> The "ipsec import" should also properly set the trust bits.
>>
>> One other funny thing is that even though the tunnel works using the old
>>> certs with the proper trust bits, when I do
>>> a "ipsec auto --listall" each server still only shows its own cert in
>>> that top list for "List of RSA Public Keys".
>>>
>>
>> The remote endpoint certificate will come in over IKE, so you will only
>> see that once you received it from the other end.
>>
>> Paul
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.libreswan.org/pipermail/swan/attachments/20160926/845afd55/attachment.html>