Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

fix(protocol): ensure attca is parsed correctly #280

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

james-d-elliott
Copy link
Member

This fixes an issue where the attca attestation (TPM 2.0) was not properly parsed due to a nuance with how the AIK certificates conform to the spec and the critical extension parsing.

@james-d-elliott james-d-elliott requested a review from a team as a code owner August 17, 2024 13:32
Copy link

coderabbitai bot commented Aug 17, 2024

Walkthrough

The recent updates enhance the attestation validation process by adding a new conditional check in the VerifyAttestation method for the AttestationObject struct, specifically for the attestation type metadata.AttCA. This change incorporates a call to the newly introduced tpmParseSANExtension function, which parses the Subject Alternative Name (SAN) extension of the X.509 certificate. Additionally, the verifyTPMFormat function has been refactored to improve error handling and clarity, particularly in parsing the Attestation Identity Key (AIK) certificate.

Changes

Files Change Summary
protocol/attestation.go Added a conditional check in VerifyAttestation for metadata.AttCA, calling tpmParseSANExtension to parse the SAN extension of the certificate.
protocol/attestation_tpm.go Refactored verifyTPMFormat for improved error handling and clarity. Introduced the tpmParseSANExtension function for SAN extension validation, added constants for OIDs, and defined a new tpmBasicConstraints struct.

Possibly related PRs

  • fix(protocol): out of date tpm manufacturers #283: The changes in this PR enhance the protocol/attestation_tpm.go file, which is directly related to the VerifyAttestation method in the main PR as both involve attestation verification processes and the handling of TPM-related functionalities.

🐰 In the meadow where bunnies dwell,
Changes sprout, oh, what a swell!
With every hop, we validate right,
Ensuring attestation shines bright.
Bugs be gone, let joy take flight! 🌟


Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

❤️ Share
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

Copy link

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 0

Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between e906bfc and ac23695.

Files selected for processing (2)
  • protocol/attestation.go (1 hunks)
  • protocol/attestation_tpm.go (4 hunks)
Additional comments not posted (4)
protocol/attestation.go (1)

252-256: LGTM! But verify the SAN parsing logic.

The changes correctly handle the metadata.AttCA attestation type by parsing the SAN extension. Ensure that the tpmParseSANExtension function is correctly implemented and integrated.

protocol/attestation_tpm.go (3)

Line range hint 150-197:
Refactoring and error handling improvements look good!

The refactoring of variable declarations and enhanced error handling improve readability and provide clearer error messages. Ensure that the new validation checks for EKU and Basic Constraints align with the specifications.

Verification successful

Validation checks for EKU and Basic Constraints are correctly implemented.

The OIDs for Extended Key Usage (2.5.29.37) and Basic Constraints (2.5.29.19) used in the code are standard and align with the specifications. The validation logic is correctly applied.

Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify the new validation checks for EKU and Basic Constraints.

# Test: Search for the usage of EKU and Basic Constraints OIDs and ensure they align with specifications.
rg --type go 'oidExtensionExtendedKeyUsage|oidExtensionBasicConstraints'

Length of output: 406


390-399: New variable and type declarations are well-organized!

The addition of OID variables and the tpmBasicConstraints type improves code readability and organization. Ensure these are used consistently and correctly throughout the code.

Verification successful

New variable and type declarations are correctly used!

The new OID variables and the tpmBasicConstraints type are consistently and correctly used in the codebase. Their integration into conditional checks and type declarations aligns with their intended purpose, enhancing the code's structure and clarity.

  • Usage confirmed in protocol/attestation_tpm.go.
Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify the usage of new OID variables and the `tpmBasicConstraints` type.

# Test: Search for the usage of the newly added variables and type to ensure consistent and correct usage.
rg --type go 'oidExtensionSubjectAltName|oidExtensionExtendedKeyUsage|oidExtensionBasicConstraints|tpmBasicConstraints'

Length of output: 901


358-387: New tpmParseSANExtension function looks good!

The function encapsulates the SAN parsing logic, improving modularity and error handling. Verify that the parsing logic correctly identifies and handles the required fields.

Verification successful

Verification Successful: tpmParseSANExtension Function

The parseSANExtension function is present and utilized within tpmParseSANExtension, ensuring that SAN parsing is handled methodically. This supports the robustness and modularity of the tpmParseSANExtension function.

  • parseSANExtension is implemented and used for SAN parsing.
  • forEachSAN is employed to iterate over SAN entries, indicating a structured parsing approach.
Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify the robustness of the `tpmParseSANExtension` function.

# Test: Search for the function implementation and ensure it correctly handles SAN parsing.
ast-grep --lang go --pattern $'func parseSANExtension($_) {
  $$$
}'

Length of output: 69


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Search for any function related to SAN parsing in the Go codebase.

# Use ripgrep to search for functions that might be related to SAN parsing.
rg --type go --pattern 'func.*SAN.*\(' -A 5

Length of output: 457


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Search for any function related to SAN parsing in the Go codebase.

# Correct the ripgrep command to search for functions that might be related to SAN parsing.
rg 'func.*SAN.*\(' --type go -A 5

Length of output: 1215

Copy link

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 0

Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between ac23695 and 6aeb62b.

Files selected for processing (2)
  • protocol/attestation.go (1 hunks)
  • protocol/attestation_tpm.go (4 hunks)
Additional comments not posted (2)
protocol/attestation.go (1)

252-256: Review of new attestation type handling.

The addition of a conditional check for metadata.AttCA is a targeted enhancement to handle specific attestation types. This change seems to integrate well with the existing structure and should improve the attestation handling process by ensuring that the Subject Alternative Name (SAN) extension is parsed correctly when necessary.

However, ensure that the tpmParseSANExtension function is robust and handles all possible edge cases, as errors in this function could lead to incorrect attestation data being accepted.

protocol/attestation_tpm.go (1)

Line range hint 150-197: Review of changes to verifyTPMFormat function.

The modifications to the verifyTPMFormat function enhance the clarity and robustness of AIK certificate parsing and validation. The introduction of the tpmParseSANExtension function as a separate method to handle SAN parsing is a good example of separation of concerns, which should make the code easier to maintain and extend.

However, ensure that the error handling within the tpmParseSANExtension function is comprehensive and that all error messages provide clear, actionable information. Additionally, the consolidation of EKU checks and the handling of unprocessed critical extensions are significant changes that should be carefully reviewed to ensure they do not introduce new issues or overlook existing ones.

Verification successful

Comprehensive Error Handling in tpmParseSANExtension Function Verified

The tpmParseSANExtension function includes detailed error handling and provides clear, actionable error messages when parsing the Subject Alternative Name (SAN) extension. This ensures robustness in AIK certificate validation.

Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Verify that the error handling within the `tpmParseSANExtension` function is comprehensive.

# Test: Search for the function implementation and unit tests. Expect: Comprehensive error handling and clear error messages.
rg --type go -A 5 $'tpmParseSANExtension'

Length of output: 653


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Retrieve the full implementation of the `tpmParseSANExtension` function for review.
ast-grep --lang go --pattern $'func tpmParseSANExtension($_) {
  $$$
}'

Length of output: 72


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Use `rg` to capture the full implementation of the `tpmParseSANExtension` function.
rg --type go -A 20 'func tpmParseSANExtension'

Length of output: 1448

This fixes an issue where the attca attestation (TPM 2.0) was not properly parsed due to a nuance with how the AIK certificates conform to the spec and the critical extension parsing.
Copy link

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (6)
protocol/attestation.go (2)

252-256: Enhance error context for TPM attestation validation

While the addition of TPM SAN extension parsing for AttCA attestation type is correct, the error handling could be improved to provide better context for debugging attestation failures.

Consider wrapping the error with additional context:

  if attestationType == string(metadata.AttCA) {
    if err = tpmParseSANExtension(x5c); err != nil {
-     return err
+     return ErrInvalidAttestation.WithDetails(fmt.Sprintf("TPM attestation SAN extension validation failed: %v", err))
    }
  }

252-256: Consider adding test coverage for TPM attestation validation

The new TPM attestation validation logic should be thoroughly tested with various test cases including:

  1. Valid TPM AttCA attestation with correct SAN extension
  2. Invalid SAN extension formats
  3. Missing SAN extension
  4. Non-TPM attestation types

Would you like me to help create comprehensive test cases for the TPM attestation validation?

protocol/attestation_tpm.go (4)

148-150: Initialize 'aikCert' directly without prior declaration.

The variable aikCert is declared at line 148 but immediately assigned in line 150. You can simplify the code by combining the declaration and assignment, which enhances readability.

Apply this diff to streamline the variable initialization:

-var aikCert *x509.Certificate

-if aikCert, err = x509.ParseCertificate(aikCertBytes); err != nil {
+if aikCert, err := x509.ParseCertificate(aikCertBytes); err != nil {
	return "", nil, ErrAttestationFormat.WithDetails("Error parsing certificate from ASN.1")
}

178-193: Refactor 'if-else' chain to a 'switch' statement for clarity.

The series of if-else conditions starting at line 179 can be refactored into a switch statement. This change improves readability and makes future extensions easier to manage.

Apply this diff to implement the refactoring:

 for _, ext := range aikCert.Extensions {
-	if ext.Id.Equal(oidExtensionSubjectAltName) {
+	switch {
+	case ext.Id.Equal(oidExtensionSubjectAltName):
		if manufacturer, model, version, err = parseSANExtension(ext.Value); err != nil {
			return "", nil, err
		}
-	} else if ext.Id.Equal(oidExtensionExtendedKeyUsage) {
+	case ext.Id.Equal(oidExtensionExtendedKeyUsage):
		if rest, err = asn1.Unmarshal(ext.Value, &eku); len(rest) != 0 || err != nil || !eku[0].Equal(tcgKpAIKCertificate) {
			return "", nil, ErrAttestationFormat.WithDetails("AIK certificate EKU missing 2.23.133.8.3")
		}
		ekuValid = true
-	} else if ext.Id.Equal(oidExtensionBasicConstraints) {
+	case ext.Id.Equal(oidExtensionBasicConstraints):
		if rest, err = asn1.Unmarshal(ext.Value, &constraints); err != nil {
			return "", nil, ErrAttestationFormat.WithDetails("AIK certificate basic constraints malformed")
		} else if len(rest) != 0 {
			return "", nil, ErrAttestationFormat.WithDetails("AIK certificate basic constraints contains extra data")
		}
+	}
 }
🧰 Tools
🪛 golangci-lint

178-178: ifElseChain: rewrite if-else to switch statement

(gocritic)


379-387: Preallocate 'unhandled' slice to optimize performance.

At line 379, the unhandled slice can be preallocated with the capacity of the original UnhandledCriticalExtensions slice. This optimization reduces memory reallocations during append operations.

Apply this diff to preallocate the slice:

-var unhandled []asn1.ObjectIdentifier
+unhandled := make([]asn1.ObjectIdentifier, 0, len(attestation.UnhandledCriticalExtensions))
🧰 Tools
🪛 golangci-lint

379-379: Consider pre-allocating unhandled

(prealloc)


395-398: Group related OID constants together for better organization.

The OID constants at lines 395-398 are related to certificate extensions. Grouping them together with a descriptive comment enhances code readability.

Consider adding a comment and grouping:

// OID constants for certificate extensions
var (
	oidExtensionSubjectAltName   = []int{2, 5, 29, 17}
	oidExtensionExtendedKeyUsage = []int{2, 5, 29, 37}
	oidExtensionBasicConstraints = []int{2, 5, 29, 19}
)
📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 6aeb62b and 48143e6.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)
  • protocol/attestation.go (1 hunks)
  • protocol/attestation_tpm.go (3 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 golangci-lint
protocol/attestation_tpm.go

178-178: ifElseChain: rewrite if-else to switch statement

(gocritic)


379-379: Consider pre-allocating unhandled

(prealloc)

🔇 Additional comments (3)
protocol/attestation.go (1)

252-256: Verify TPM attestation type handling

The code adds critical validation for TPM AttCA attestation type. Let's verify that this is the only attestation type that requires SAN extension parsing and that the tpmParseSANExtension function properly validates all required fields according to the TPM 2.0 specification.

✅ Verification successful

Based on the search results, I can now generate the final response:

TPM AttCA attestation type validation is correctly implemented

The code correctly handles TPM AttCA attestation type validation. The search results confirm:

  • AttCA is a specific attestation type defined in metadata/types.go for PrivacyCA attestation
  • SAN extension parsing is only used for TPM AttCA attestation (no other usage found)
  • The tpmParseSANExtension function in attestation_tpm.go properly validates the SAN extension according to TPM 2.0 specification requirements, with appropriate error handling for invalid AIK certificate data
🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for other TPM attestation types and SAN extension usage

# Search for TPM-related attestation type definitions
echo "Checking TPM attestation type definitions:"
rg -A 3 "type\s+(?:Att|Attestation)" --type go

# Search for other places where SAN extensions are parsed
echo "Checking SAN extension parsing usage:"
rg "ParseSANExtension|GetExtension.*subject.*alternative.*name" --type go

# Search for TPM-related constants and types
echo "Checking TPM-related code:"
rg "TPM|AttCA|AIK" --type go

Length of output: 10998

protocol/attestation_tpm.go (2)

375-377: ⚠️ Potential issue

Enhance validation of SAN data fields for security compliance.

The check for empty manufacturer, model, or version strings ensures they are present but does not validate their content. Consider adding stricter validation to ensure these fields contain acceptable values, preventing potential security risks from malformed or malicious data.

Would you like assistance in implementing additional validation checks for these fields?


381-387: ⚠️ Potential issue

Avoid modifying the slice while iterating over it.

Modifying attestation.UnhandledCriticalExtensions within the loop can lead to unexpected behavior. Instead of altering the original slice, consider creating a new slice for unhandled extensions.

Apply this diff to safely handle the unhandled critical extensions:

 for _, uce := range attestation.UnhandledCriticalExtensions {
 	if uce.Equal(oidExtensionSubjectAltName) {
 		continue
 	}
 
-	unhandled = append(unhandled, uce)
+	unhandled = append(unhandled, uce)
 }
 
-attestation.UnhandledCriticalExtensions = unhandled
+attestation.UnhandledCriticalExtensions = unhandled

Ensure that you're not modifying the slice being iterated over to prevent runtime errors.

Likely invalid or redundant comment.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant