[PATCH] OpenVPN: Valid til days is required with OpenVPN-2.4.x

[PATCH] OpenVPN: Valid til days is required with OpenVPN-2.4.x

[Erik Kapfer]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3226 bytes --]

Check has been integrated that the OpenSSL maximum of '999999' valid days can not be exceeded.
Check for needed entry in 'Valid til days' field has been integrated.
Asterisk for 'Valid til days' field has been set to mark it as required field.

Signed-off-by: Erik Kapfer <erik.kapfer(a)ipfire.org>
---
 html/cgi-bin/ovpnmain.cgi | 24 +++++++++++++++++++++---
 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/html/cgi-bin/ovpnmain.cgi b/html/cgi-bin/ovpnmain.cgi
index eac962e..99d39a9 100644
--- a/html/cgi-bin/ovpnmain.cgi
+++ b/html/cgi-bin/ovpnmain.cgi
@@ -3980,6 +3980,16 @@ if ($cgiparams{'TYPE'} eq 'net') {
       		goto VPNCONF_ERROR;
 	}
 
+	# Check for N2N that OpenSSL maximum of valid days will not be exceeded
+	if ($cgiparams{'TYPE'} eq 'net') {
+		if ($cgiparams{'DAYS_VALID'} >= '999999') {
+			$errormessage = $Lang::tr{'invalid input for valid till days'};
+			unlink ("${General::swroot}/ovpn/n2nconf/$cgiparams{'NAME'}/$cgiparams{'NAME'}.conf") or die "Removing Configfile fail: $!";
+			rmdir ("${General::swroot}/ovpn/n2nconf/$cgiparams{'NAME'}") || die "Removing Directory fail: $!";
+			goto VPNCONF_ERROR;
+		}
+	}
+
 	if ($cgiparams{'ENABLED'} !~ /^(on|off)$/) {
 	    $errormessage = $Lang::tr{'invalid input'};
 	    goto VPNCONF_ERROR;
@@ -4157,11 +4167,19 @@ if ($cgiparams{'TYPE'} eq 'net') {
 		$errormessage = $Lang::tr{'passwords do not match'};
 		goto VPNCONF_ERROR;
 	    }
-	    if ($cgiparams{'DAYS_VALID'} ne '' && $cgiparams{'DAYS_VALID'} !~ /^[0-9]+$/) {
+	    if ($cgiparams{'DAYS_VALID'} eq '' && $cgiparams{'DAYS_VALID'} !~ /^[0-9]+$/) {
 		$errormessage = $Lang::tr{'invalid input for valid till days'};
 		goto VPNCONF_ERROR;
 	    }
 
+	    # Check for RW that OpenSSL maximum of valid days will not be exceeded
+	    if ($cgiparams{'TYPE'} eq 'host') {
+		if ($cgiparams{'DAYS_VALID'} >= '999999') {
+			$errormessage = $Lang::tr{'invalid input for valid till days'};
+			goto VPNCONF_ERROR;
+		}
+	    }
+
 	    # Replace empty strings with a .
 	    (my $ou = $cgiparams{'CERT_OU'}) =~ s/^\s*$/\./;
 	    (my $city = $cgiparams{'CERT_CITY'}) =~ s/^\s*$/\./;
@@ -4813,7 +4831,7 @@ END
 if ($cgiparams{'TYPE'} eq 'host') {
 	print <<END;
 	</select></td></tr>
-		<td>&nbsp;</td><td class='base'>$Lang::tr{'valid till'} (days):</td>
+		<td>&nbsp;</td><td class='base'>$Lang::tr{'valid till'} (days):&nbsp;<img src='/blob.gif' alt='*' /</td>
 		<td class='base' nowrap='nowrap'><input type='text' name='DAYS_VALID' value='$cgiparams{'DAYS_VALID'}' size='32' $cakeydisabled /></td></tr>
 		<tr><td>&nbsp;</td>
 		<td class='base'>$Lang::tr{'pkcs12 file password'}:</td>
@@ -4828,7 +4846,7 @@ END
 }else{
 	print <<END;
 	</select></td></tr>
-		<td>&nbsp;</td><td class='base'>$Lang::tr{'valid till'} (days):</td>
+		<td>&nbsp;</td><td class='base'>$Lang::tr{'valid till'} (days):&nbsp;<img src='/blob.gif' alt='*' /</td>
 		<td class='base' nowrap='nowrap'><input type='text' name='DAYS_VALID' value='$cgiparams{'DAYS_VALID'}' size='32' $cakeydisabled /></td></tr>
 		<tr><td>&nbsp;</td><td>&nbsp;</td><td>&nbsp;</td></tr>
 		<tr><td>&nbsp;</td><td>&nbsp;</td><td>&nbsp;</td></tr>
-- 
2.7.4

Re: [PATCH] OpenVPN: Valid til days is required with OpenVPN-2.4.x

[ummeegge]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 110 bytes --]

Have seen it too late to announce it in the commit message but this
patch solves also Bug #11715

Best,

Erik

Re: [PATCH] OpenVPN: Valid til days is required with OpenVPN-2.4.x

[Michael Tremer]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 367 bytes --]

Hello,

can we also set a good default value for this?

This can be a little bit confusing for new users and it would be good to have
some guidance. It can be a separate patch.

Best,
-Michael

On Fri, 2018-06-15 at 14:59 +0200, ummeegge wrote:
> Have seen it too late to announce it in the commit message but this
> patch solves also Bug #11715
> 
> Best,
> 
> Erik

Re: [PATCH] OpenVPN: Valid til days is required with OpenVPN-2.4.x

[ummeegge]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 754 bytes --]

Hi Michael,
yes but the needs in there can differs a lot so the question arises
what is a good default ?
Another idea might be to add another (or a range of possible days) text
for that field ?
May the error message if an entry triggers one can also be extended.

Greetings,

Erik

Am Sonntag, den 17.06.2018, 19:14 +0100 schrieb Michael Tremer:
> Hello,
> 
> can we also set a good default value for this?
> 
> This can be a little bit confusing for new users and it would be good
> to have
> some guidance. It can be a separate patch.
> 
> Best,
> -Michael
> 
> On Fri, 2018-06-15 at 14:59 +0200, ummeegge wrote:
> > 
> > Have seen it too late to announce it in the commit message but this
> > patch solves also Bug #11715
> > 
> > Best,
> > 
> > Erik

Re: [PATCH] OpenVPN: Valid til days is required with OpenVPN-2.4.x

[Tom Rymes]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3143 bytes --]

Erik,

Tossing this back on the list, I hope you don't mind.

My apologies, I was unclear. What I mean is that the user will *want* a 
longer lifetime, even though the longest *possible* lifetime will be too 
long for security reasons.

In other words, my suggestion would be to use the longest lifetime 
consistent with best practices, like those that you include below.

Tom

On 06/18/2018 8:00 AM, ummeegge wrote:
> Hi Tom,
> in my opinion this is the wrong suggestion since we circumvent in fact
> the new security feature from OpenSSL. The longest lifetime would be
> then '999998' days which is adequate to ~2740 years whereby we and our
> systems possibly wont go through :D .
> 
> Additionally OpenVPNs hardening wiki --> https://community.openvpn.net/openvpn/wiki/Hardening#X.509keysize
> points a so called "future system near term use" (data are from Enisa) out
> whereby 3072 bit RSA key lenghts and more are recommended to stay safe in
> Enisa definitions for at least 10 years (research was from 2013) but IPFire uses
> currently 2048 bit RSA for the host certificate.
> 
> May not representative but Microsoft said in 2009 something like this:
> 
> Key length of 1024:  Validity period = not greater than 6-12 monthsKey length of 2048:  Validity period = not greater than 2 yearsKey length of 4096:  Validity period = not greater than 16 years
> 
> <-- is from https://cloudblogs.microsoft.com/enterprisemobility/2009/06/12/recommendations-for-pki-key-lengths-and-validity-periods-with-configuration-manager/
> 
> May there are more actual papers for that...
> 
> 
> Best,
> 
> Erik
> 
> 
> Am Montag, den 18.06.2018, 06:27 -0400 schrieb Tom Rymes:
>> I’d suggest that most users likely want the longest lifetime for
>> their certs that they can get, so as to avoid the need to frequently
>> replace expired certificates.
>>
>> This is especially true because there is no way to recreate certs in
>> the WUI when they expire, so you have to delete the entry and
>> recreate it when that happens.
>>
>> https://bugzilla.ipfire.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11742
>>
>> My $0.02,
>>
>> Tom
>>
>> On Jun 18, 2018, at 3:56 AM, ummeegge <ummeegge(a)ipfire.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Michael,
>>> yes but the needs in there can differs a lot so the question arises
>>> what is a good default ?
>>> Another idea might be to add another (or a range of possible days)
>>> text
>>> for that field ?
>>> May the error message if an entry triggers one can also be
>>> extended.
>>>
>>> Greetings,
>>>
>>> Erik
>>>
>>> Am Sonntag, den 17.06.2018, 19:14 +0100 schrieb Michael Tremer:
>>>> Hello,
>>>
>>
>> can we also set a good default value for this?
>>
>>
>> This can be a little bit confusing for new users and it would be good
>>
>> to have
>>
>> some guidance. It can be a separate patch.
>>
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> -Michael
>>
>>
>> On Fri, 2018-06-15 at 14:59 +0200, ummeegge wrote:
>>
>>>
>>
>>> Have seen it too late to announce it in the commit message but this
>>
>>> patch solves also Bug #11715
>>
>>>
>>
>>> Best,
>>
>>>
>>
>>> Erik

Re: [PATCH] OpenVPN: Valid til days is required with OpenVPN-2.4.x

[Michael Tremer]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3596 bytes --]

How relevant is this one here?

  https://bugzilla.ipfire.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10482

-Michael

On Mon, 2018-06-18 at 08:21 -0400, Tom Rymes wrote:
> Erik,
> 
> Tossing this back on the list, I hope you don't mind.
> 
> My apologies, I was unclear. What I mean is that the user will *want* a 
> longer lifetime, even though the longest *possible* lifetime will be too 
> long for security reasons.
> 
> In other words, my suggestion would be to use the longest lifetime 
> consistent with best practices, like those that you include below.
> 
> Tom
> 
> On 06/18/2018 8:00 AM, ummeegge wrote:
> > Hi Tom,
> > in my opinion this is the wrong suggestion since we circumvent in fact
> > the new security feature from OpenSSL. The longest lifetime would be
> > then '999998' days which is adequate to ~2740 years whereby we and our
> > systems possibly wont go through :D .
> > 
> > Additionally OpenVPNs hardening wiki --> https://community.openvpn.net/openv
> > pn/wiki/Hardening#X.509keysize
> > points a so called "future system near term use" (data are from Enisa) out
> > whereby 3072 bit RSA key lenghts and more are recommended to stay safe in
> > Enisa definitions for at least 10 years (research was from 2013) but IPFire
> > uses
> > currently 2048 bit RSA for the host certificate.
> > 
> > May not representative but Microsoft said in 2009 something like this:
> > 
> > Key length of 1024:  Validity period = not greater than 6-12 monthsKey
> > length of 2048:  Validity period = not greater than 2 yearsKey length of
> > 4096:  Validity period = not greater than 16 years
> > 
> > <-- is from https://cloudblogs.microsoft.com/enterprisemobility/2009/06/12/r
> > ecommendations-for-pki-key-lengths-and-validity-periods-with-configuration-
> > manager/
> > 
> > May there are more actual papers for that...
> > 
> > 
> > Best,
> > 
> > Erik
> > 
> > 
> > Am Montag, den 18.06.2018, 06:27 -0400 schrieb Tom Rymes:
> > > I’d suggest that most users likely want the longest lifetime for
> > > their certs that they can get, so as to avoid the need to frequently
> > > replace expired certificates.
> > > 
> > > This is especially true because there is no way to recreate certs in
> > > the WUI when they expire, so you have to delete the entry and
> > > recreate it when that happens.
> > > 
> > > https://bugzilla.ipfire.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11742
> > > 
> > > My $0.02,
> > > 
> > > Tom
> > > 
> > > On Jun 18, 2018, at 3:56 AM, ummeegge <ummeegge(a)ipfire.org> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Hi Michael,
> > > > yes but the needs in there can differs a lot so the question arises
> > > > what is a good default ?
> > > > Another idea might be to add another (or a range of possible days)
> > > > text
> > > > for that field ?
> > > > May the error message if an entry triggers one can also be
> > > > extended.
> > > > 
> > > > Greetings,
> > > > 
> > > > Erik
> > > > 
> > > > Am Sonntag, den 17.06.2018, 19:14 +0100 schrieb Michael Tremer:
> > > > > Hello,
> > > 
> > > can we also set a good default value for this?
> > > 
> > > 
> > > This can be a little bit confusing for new users and it would be good
> > > 
> > > to have
> > > 
> > > some guidance. It can be a separate patch.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Best,
> > > 
> > > -Michael
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On Fri, 2018-06-15 at 14:59 +0200, ummeegge wrote:
> > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Have seen it too late to announce it in the commit message but this
> > > > patch solves also Bug #11715
> > > > 
> > > > Best,
> > > > 
> > > > Erik
> 
> 

Re: [PATCH] OpenVPN: Valid til days is required with OpenVPN-2.4.x

[Michael Tremer]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4350 bytes --]

I think that a reasonable default would be 2 years.

That is already the maximum I would feel comfortable with, but certificates
*must* expire. They should not run for forever.

But I agree with Tom that there should be an easy way to extend the certificate
and that we should have some UI elements that warn when a certificate is going
to expire in the next ~30 days or so.

@Erik: Would you be up for implementing this?

Best,
-Michael

On Mon, 2018-06-18 at 14:09 +0100, Michael Tremer wrote:
> How relevant is this one here?
> 
>   https://bugzilla.ipfire.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10482
> 
> -Michael
> 
> On Mon, 2018-06-18 at 08:21 -0400, Tom Rymes wrote:
> > Erik,
> > 
> > Tossing this back on the list, I hope you don't mind.
> > 
> > My apologies, I was unclear. What I mean is that the user will *want* a 
> > longer lifetime, even though the longest *possible* lifetime will be too 
> > long for security reasons.
> > 
> > In other words, my suggestion would be to use the longest lifetime 
> > consistent with best practices, like those that you include below.
> > 
> > Tom
> > 
> > On 06/18/2018 8:00 AM, ummeegge wrote:
> > > Hi Tom,
> > > in my opinion this is the wrong suggestion since we circumvent in fact
> > > the new security feature from OpenSSL. The longest lifetime would be
> > > then '999998' days which is adequate to ~2740 years whereby we and our
> > > systems possibly wont go through :D .
> > > 
> > > Additionally OpenVPNs hardening wiki --> https://community.openvpn.net/ope
> > > nv
> > > pn/wiki/Hardening#X.509keysize
> > > points a so called "future system near term use" (data are from Enisa) out
> > > whereby 3072 bit RSA key lenghts and more are recommended to stay safe in
> > > Enisa definitions for at least 10 years (research was from 2013) but
> > > IPFire
> > > uses
> > > currently 2048 bit RSA for the host certificate.
> > > 
> > > May not representative but Microsoft said in 2009 something like this:
> > > 
> > > Key length of 1024:  Validity period = not greater than 6-12 monthsKey
> > > length of 2048:  Validity period = not greater than 2 yearsKey length of
> > > 4096:  Validity period = not greater than 16 years
> > > 
> > > <-- is from https://cloudblogs.microsoft.com/enterprisemobility/2009/06/12
> > > /r
> > > ecommendations-for-pki-key-lengths-and-validity-periods-with-
> > > configuration-
> > > manager/
> > > 
> > > May there are more actual papers for that...
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Best,
> > > 
> > > Erik
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Am Montag, den 18.06.2018, 06:27 -0400 schrieb Tom Rymes:
> > > > I’d suggest that most users likely want the longest lifetime for
> > > > their certs that they can get, so as to avoid the need to frequently
> > > > replace expired certificates.
> > > > 
> > > > This is especially true because there is no way to recreate certs in
> > > > the WUI when they expire, so you have to delete the entry and
> > > > recreate it when that happens.
> > > > 
> > > > https://bugzilla.ipfire.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11742
> > > > 
> > > > My $0.02,
> > > > 
> > > > Tom
> > > > 
> > > > On Jun 18, 2018, at 3:56 AM, ummeegge <ummeegge(a)ipfire.org> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > Hi Michael,
> > > > > yes but the needs in there can differs a lot so the question arises
> > > > > what is a good default ?
> > > > > Another idea might be to add another (or a range of possible days)
> > > > > text
> > > > > for that field ?
> > > > > May the error message if an entry triggers one can also be
> > > > > extended.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Greetings,
> > > > > 
> > > > > Erik
> > > > > 
> > > > > Am Sonntag, den 17.06.2018, 19:14 +0100 schrieb Michael Tremer:
> > > > > > Hello,
> > > > 
> > > > can we also set a good default value for this?
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > This can be a little bit confusing for new users and it would be good
> > > > 
> > > > to have
> > > > 
> > > > some guidance. It can be a separate patch.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Best,
> > > > 
> > > > -Michael
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > On Fri, 2018-06-15 at 14:59 +0200, ummeegge wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Have seen it too late to announce it in the commit message but this
> > > > > patch solves also Bug #11715
> > > > > 
> > > > > Best,
> > > > > 
> > > > > Erik

Re: [PATCH] OpenVPN: Valid til days is required with OpenVPN-2.4.x

[ummeegge]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 736 bytes --]

Hi Michael,
yes i think 730 days are a good default. Patch is already made.
Can you merge the already delivered one so i can pull the actual state
and make then an own patch for this ?

Best,

Erik

Am Montag, den 18.06.2018, 14:51 +0100 schrieb Michael Tremer:
> I think that a reasonable default would be 2 years.
> 
> That is already the maximum I would feel comfortable with, but
> certificates
> *must* expire. They should not run for forever.
> 
> But I agree with Tom that there should be an easy way to extend the
> certificate
> and that we should have some UI elements that warn when a certificate
> is going
> to expire in the next ~30 days or so.
> 
> @Erik: Would you be up for implementing this?
> 
> Best,
> -Michael
> 

Re: [PATCH] OpenVPN: Valid til days is required with OpenVPN-2.4.x

[Michael Tremer]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1102 bytes --]

Yes, can do. Please see "next".

In the future, you can create an own OpenVPN branch where all those proposed
patches are collected to be able to work a little bit independent from me and
also to collect patches and submit them in one go.

Best,
-Michael

On Mon, 2018-06-18 at 16:05 +0200, ummeegge wrote:
> Hi Michael,
> yes i think 730 days are a good default. Patch is already made.
> Can you merge the already delivered one so i can pull the actual state
> and make then an own patch for this ?
> 
> Best,
> 
> Erik
> 
> Am Montag, den 18.06.2018, 14:51 +0100 schrieb Michael Tremer:
> > I think that a reasonable default would be 2 years.
> > 
> > That is already the maximum I would feel comfortable with, but
> > certificates
> > *must* expire. They should not run for forever.
> > 
> > But I agree with Tom that there should be an easy way to extend the
> > certificate
> > and that we should have some UI elements that warn when a certificate
> > is going
> > to expire in the next ~30 days or so.
> > 
> > @Erik: Would you be up for implementing this?
> > 
> > Best,
> > -Michael
> > 
> 
> 

Re: [PATCH] OpenVPN: Valid til days is required with OpenVPN-2.4.x

[ummeegge]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 381 bytes --]

OK, will do that. Thanks.

Best,

Erik

Am Montag, den 18.06.2018, 15:08 +0100 schrieb Michael Tremer:
> Yes, can do. Please see "next".
> 
> In the future, you can create an own OpenVPN branch where all those
> proposed
> patches are collected to be able to work a little bit independent
> from me and
> also to collect patches and submit them in one go.
> 
> Best,
> -Michael
>