openssl: update to version 1.1.1h #4155

th0ma7 · 2020-09-01T01:56:53Z

Motivation: Our version of OpenSSL is just way to old and needs to be updated. Suggesting to either update at same API level for now (e.g. 1.0.2) or to move to next version of openssl (e.g. 1.1.1g) and keep previous version for legacy purposes.
Linked issues: #3629, #3560 and possibly #3666, closes #4185

Checklist

Build rule all-supported completed successfully

Package updates

boxbackup-client 0.12-2
fossil-scm 2.12.1-2
git 2.28.0-16
haproxy 1.8.26-21
links 2.21-2
synocli-file 1.2-4 (update midnight commander to 4.8.25)

Packages with new revision due to openssl update

Dependent packages not updated due to WIP or failing build

ejabberd
ffsync
monit
rutorrent
shairport-sync

Packages depending on python (2 or 3) - need only python update

duplicity
mercurial
octoprint
rdiff-backup
sabnzbd
vim

th0ma7 · 2020-09-01T10:20:15Z

By the look of things only packages known to fail already on master have failed from the github-action. As such looking good for a merge unless I'm missing something.

ymartin59 · 2020-09-03T18:48:22Z

As far as I remember, it is not so obvious because all most all applications depends on openssl and some (old) libraries have not received updates to support recent openssl api. May you please confirm @m4tt075 @hgy59

th0ma7 · 2020-09-03T20:23:23Z

Its the reason why I've kept it to 1.0.2 API for now.
github-action output looked real good besides packages known to fail already.

Safihre · 2020-09-04T17:23:19Z

@ymartin59 as long as we stick with the 1.0.2 branch even the old ones should compile. Indeed the OpenSSL 1.1.0 is much different.
I imagine we will need 2 OpenSSL packages, since many up to date applications benefit from the stuff in OpenSSL 1.1.

th0ma7 · 2020-09-05T12:32:29Z

Thnx @Safihre it's what I thought as well.

I imagine we will need 2 OpenSSL packages, since many up to date applications benefit from the stuff in OpenSSL 1.1.

An idea could be, with the upcoming arrival of DSM-7 (if ever), move current openssl 1.0.2 as openssl-legacy and create a new default openssl using latest version available (e.g. 2.x). Any application that do not build correctly gets adjusted to use openssl-legacy, and all that works continue using openssl. That could even be done before then I guess but could be a huge undertaking as github-actions won't provide in-depth build-testing on every platforms.

publicarray · 2020-09-13T01:56:39Z

FYI There is a new 🦝 "Raccoon" Attack (CVE-2020-1968) with a Severity: Low

https://www.openssl.org/news/secadv/20200909.txt

https://www.openssl.org/news/vulnerabilities.html

th0ma7 · 2020-09-13T02:05:29Z

FYI There is a new raccoon "Raccoon" Attack (CVE-2020-1968) with a Severity: Low

Interesting although fixed in version 1.0.2w which is only available with premium support. Alghough this might lead into making version 1.0.2v publicly available.

OpenSSL 1.0.2f and above will only reuse a DH secret if a "static" DH
ciphersuite is used. These static "DH" ciphersuites are ones that start with the
text "DH-" (for example "DH-RSA-AES256-SHA"). The standard IANA names for these
ciphersuites all start with "TLS_DH_" but excludes those that start with
"TLS_DH_anon_".

th0ma7 · 2020-09-14T01:33:17Z

BTW, with this update we address the following low security issues:

Anyone see blockers to this or does it sound reasonable?

publicarray · 2020-09-15T00:39:17Z

I quickly looked at the build logs and I'm a bit confused why the synocli-file package failed, It builds ok on master. I can spend some time looking at it once my power is back on ⚡ ...

th0ma7 · 2020-09-15T00:46:16Z

I quickly looked at the build logs and I'm a bit confused why the synocli-file package failed, It builds ok on master. I can spend some time looking at it once my power is back on zap ...

May well be due to not being rebased against master where a fix might already be?

th0ma7 · 2020-09-17T22:30:20Z

WARNING: This is a test for considerations, easy to roll-back to previous commit.

I wanted to have both a) an overview of the impact of migrating to openssl 1.1.1 branch and b) check the feasibility of telling openssl to use /etc/ssl by default for it's configurations, thus /etc/ssl/certs for its certificates.

As such, I've moved existing openssl to openssl-legacy and upgraded default openssl to 1.1.1 branch. This allow pointing incompatible application to older version of openssl.

Thoughts on this welcomed (while it gives it a try at compiling the entire stack) :-)

Safihre · 2020-09-18T06:54:34Z

Unless you want to manually try every single package (just making it compile isn't enough), I would suggest the opposite approach: create a openssl-11 package that maintainers of the SPK packages can include when they do an update. Makes it lot less of a big bang approach.

publicarray · 2020-09-18T08:41:55Z

I agree with @Safihre (mostly because that is how other package managers have handled the same condition) but I also do see the value of getting a one time report on what compiles with the new API. Which I think was your intent here anyway

th0ma7 · 2020-09-18T09:53:15Z

Thnx @Safihre and @publicarray for your feedbacks. The good news is that the build output difference seems to be around a handful of packages (fossil-scm, haproxy, links, memcached, monit, python, tmux, transmission).

There are two aspects to this proposal if we're intersted at moving this further (let me know if I've missed something obvious):

1) Method:
a) Enforce usage of the new openssl with expectation that new builds will be fixed/tested by package maintainers and move back to older version of openssl as needed.
b) Keep the old, unsupported and insecure openssl as default and expect package maintainers to gradually migrate to the new version.

2) Naming:
a) What ever the default version is, keep it as cross/openssl
b) Use version schema: cross/openssl-1.0 and cross/openssl-1.1
c) Use default naming and -legacy

Personally I would use a conjunction of 1a) + mix of 2a) + 2b) where default is always openssl and other releases gets tagged with a version (e.g. cross/openssl-1.0).

ymartin59 · 2020-09-19T16:01:41Z

@th0ma7 I agree with the method. My preference is 1a) with cross/openssl for latest and keep cross/openssl-1.0.

th0ma7 · 2020-09-20T20:07:51Z

I've renamed openssl-legacy as openssl-1.0 and kept latest version as openssl + rebased to master.

By the look of things, and please let me know if I'm mistaking, looks like there is interest to this from multiple people.

@ymartin59, @Safihre, @publicarray, @BenjV, @hgy59 : Would there be someone able to try it out with one or a few package(s) that heavily depends on openssl to see how it behave with both version 1.1 and using default system-wide /etc/ssl ?

BenjV · 2020-09-20T21:27:19Z

If someone can build a python version with Openssl 1.1.1 for Armada38X I wil be happy to test it on my test Nas (DS116)

th0ma7 · 2020-09-21T01:01:54Z

@BenjV I was able to build a python3 package set that I made available at:

https://github.com/th0ma7/synology/tree/master/packages/openssl-1.1

python2 refuses to build. After investigating it seems M2Crypto requires to be updated to a newer version along with passing --openssl=$(STAGING_INSTALL_PREFIX) option at build time or something close to that. I guess other synocommunity developpoers more into python may have a better understanding on where the issue really is.

ymartin59 · 2020-09-21T08:05:34Z

@th0ma7 Thanks for Python 3 testing. I really think we should not bother with Python 2.7 any longer.

Safihre · 2020-09-21T08:58:36Z

Agreed, Python 2.7 is end-of-life and I can tell from experience that it doesn't handle OpenSSL 1.1.1 well.
@th0ma7 So I would suggest to keep Python 2.7 on the openssl-1.0 package.

th0ma7 · 2020-10-10T13:57:46Z

@hgy59 @th0ma7 OK so my fears are confirmed... I will have to re-publish in a bunch a large number of packages... the same as previous python 2.7.18 update. I hope not to miss one in the check list...

I've created an issue for your consideration @hgy59 and @ymartin59 in order to track publishing of all updated packages at #4211 . The intent is to be able to share the load for publishing and ensure we track of things as we move along.

Is this PR good for merge? I think both myself and @hgy59 tends to agree on that (again, awsome work!). But considering the scale of the PR I want to make sure you are OK with that @ymartin59 before merging.

- add patch to fix openssl path in m2crypto

- update htop to 3.0.2 (older versions are not available) - include htop in synocli-monitor for all DSM versions - remove REQUIRED_DSM in sonarr/Makefile for armv7-1.2 (rely on dependency of mono) - cleanup umurmur/Makefile - fix c-ares/Makefile

- downgrade slang to 2.2.4

- disable parallel make

- add .NOTPARALLEL target to disable parallel make

ymartin59

Large amount of work. Looks good to me.
I still propose some minor improvements.

cross/boxbackup/Makefile

ymartin59 · 2020-10-11T05:39:23Z

cross/haproxy/Makefile

+.PHONY: haproxy_install
+haproxy_install:
 	$(RUN) $(MAKE) install DESTDIR=$(INSTALL_DIR) PREFIX=$(INSTALL_PREFIX)


This looks look like standard default "make install" target. May you please confirm by discarding its replacement?

@ymartin59 disagree, the small difference is prefix vs PREFIX

cross/haproxy/Makefile

cross/links/Makefile

cross/openssl/Makefile

ymartin59 · 2020-10-11T06:08:35Z

spk/links/Makefile

@@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ MAINTAINER = SynoCommunity
 DESCRIPTION = Links is a web browser running in text mode.
 DISPLAY_NAME = Links
 STARTABLE = no
-BETA = 1
+CHANGELOG = "1. Update links to 2.21.<br/>2. Update openssl to 1.1."


I think it would make sense to move this tool in synocli-net

@ymartin59 agree, this should be done in #4195, I updated #4211 accordingly.

hgy59 · 2020-10-11T09:39:06Z

rebased @ master

hgy59 · 2020-10-11T10:49:25Z

Large amount of work.

@ymartin59 I could take some tasks (only today, afterwards I am off my development environment for two weeks).

My preferences:

synocli-net (merge Update synocli net #4195, build, test and publish)
synocli-file (build, test and publish)
ntopng (build, test and publish)

- libwebsockets fails to build for ppc (except qoriq) since update to openssl 1.1.

hgy59 · 2020-10-11T17:30:17Z

Unfortunately arch-ppc853x fails to build libwebsockets and dependent mosquitto since update to openssl 1.1.

* update openssl to 1.1.1h * update openssl dependents * fix python - add patch to fix openssl path in m2crypto * fix build of haproxy * update spk versions/revisions * fix package builds - update htop to 3.0.2 (older versions are not available) - include htop in synocli-monitor for all DSM versions - remove REQUIRED_DSM in sonarr/Makefile for armv7-1.2 (rely on dependency of mono) - cleanup umurmur/Makefile - fix c-ares/Makefile * fix gh status for skipped sonar (nzbdrone) package * fix slang build - add .NOTPARALLEL target to disable parallel make * incorporate codereview * add unsupported ppc853x-5.2 - libwebsockets fails to build for ppc (except qoriq) since update to openssl 1.1. Co-authored-by: hgy59 <[email protected]>

th0ma7 self-assigned this Sep 1, 2020

th0ma7 added the status/needs-review label Sep 1, 2020

th0ma7 requested review from hgy59 and ymartin59 September 1, 2020 10:19

th0ma7 added the status/ready-to-merge label Sep 1, 2020

th0ma7 removed the status/ready-to-merge label Sep 17, 2020

ymartin59 mentioned this pull request Sep 20, 2020

Python(2 and 3) build with Openssl version 1.1.1 (feature request) #4185

Closed

th0ma7 force-pushed the openssl-102u branch from 3e08431 to 4a03a2f Compare September 20, 2020 20:00

ymartin59 changed the title ~~openssl: Bump to version 1.0.2u~~ openssl: update to version 1.0.2u and 1.1.1g Sep 21, 2020

ymartin59 changed the title ~~openssl: update to version 1.0.2u and 1.1.1g~~ openssl: update to versions 1.0.2u and 1.1.1g Sep 21, 2020

hgy59 mentioned this pull request Oct 10, 2020

mosquitto: update to 1.6.12 #4191

Merged

3 tasks

th0ma7 and others added 16 commits October 11, 2020 00:54

openssl: Move v1.0 to legacy and upgrade to 1.1.1 branch

b554525

openssl: Rename legacy version to -1.0

471291d

python2: Force usage of legacy openssl-1.0

1700208

openssl-1.0 and python2: Fix certificate verification

3e6b2dc

update openssl to 1.1.1h

6bccbe7

remove openssl 1.0

03a1b0a

update openssl dependents

9e07175

fix python

a23c432

- add patch to fix openssl path in m2crypto

fix build of haproxy

826d542

fix spk versions/revisions

e1c85e4

fix package builds

56f7f09

- update htop to 3.0.2 (older versions are not available) - include htop in synocli-monitor for all DSM versions - remove REQUIRED_DSM in sonarr/Makefile for armv7-1.2 (rely on dependency of mono) - cleanup umurmur/Makefile - fix c-ares/Makefile

radarr: update revision

1b607bd

try to fix build with github

c371250

- downgrade slang to 2.2.4

fix gh status for skipped sonar (nzbdrone) package

33e8b2d

try to fix slang build

d5ae86d

- disable parallel make

fix build of slang

1064997

- add .NOTPARALLEL target to disable parallel make

ymartin59 requested changes Oct 11, 2020

View reviewed changes

hgy59 force-pushed the openssl-102u branch from 074835e to 1064997 Compare October 11, 2020 09:38

hgy59 added 2 commits October 11, 2020 12:19

update mosquitto package revision

46a7931

incorporate codereview

2b0947a

add unsupported ppc853x-5.2

2548c81

- libwebsockets fails to build for ppc (except qoriq) since update to openssl 1.1.

hgy59 merged commit 26ad900 into SynoCommunity:master Oct 11, 2020

th0ma7 deleted the openssl-102u branch October 12, 2020 13:14

hgy59 removed the status/ready-to-merge label Nov 10, 2020

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

openssl: update to version 1.1.1h #4155

openssl: update to version 1.1.1h #4155

th0ma7 commented Sep 1, 2020 •

edited by hgy59

Loading

th0ma7 commented Sep 1, 2020

ymartin59 commented Sep 3, 2020

th0ma7 commented Sep 3, 2020

Safihre commented Sep 4, 2020

th0ma7 commented Sep 5, 2020

publicarray commented Sep 13, 2020 •

edited

Loading

th0ma7 commented Sep 13, 2020

th0ma7 commented Sep 14, 2020

publicarray commented Sep 15, 2020 •

edited

Loading

th0ma7 commented Sep 15, 2020

th0ma7 commented Sep 17, 2020

Safihre commented Sep 18, 2020

publicarray commented Sep 18, 2020 •

edited

Loading

th0ma7 commented Sep 18, 2020

ymartin59 commented Sep 19, 2020

th0ma7 commented Sep 20, 2020

BenjV commented Sep 20, 2020

th0ma7 commented Sep 21, 2020 •

edited

Loading

ymartin59 commented Sep 21, 2020

Safihre commented Sep 21, 2020

th0ma7 commented Oct 10, 2020

ymartin59 left a comment

ymartin59 Oct 11, 2020

hgy59 Oct 11, 2020

ymartin59 Oct 11, 2020

hgy59 Oct 11, 2020

hgy59 commented Oct 11, 2020

hgy59 commented Oct 11, 2020

hgy59 commented Oct 11, 2020

openssl: update to version 1.1.1h #4155

openssl: update to version 1.1.1h #4155

Conversation

th0ma7 commented Sep 1, 2020 • edited by hgy59 Loading

Checklist

Package updates

Packages with new revision due to openssl update

Dependent packages not updated due to WIP or failing build

Packages depending on python (2 or 3) - need only python update

th0ma7 commented Sep 1, 2020

ymartin59 commented Sep 3, 2020

th0ma7 commented Sep 3, 2020

Safihre commented Sep 4, 2020

th0ma7 commented Sep 5, 2020

publicarray commented Sep 13, 2020 • edited Loading

th0ma7 commented Sep 13, 2020

th0ma7 commented Sep 14, 2020

publicarray commented Sep 15, 2020 • edited Loading

th0ma7 commented Sep 15, 2020

th0ma7 commented Sep 17, 2020

Safihre commented Sep 18, 2020

publicarray commented Sep 18, 2020 • edited Loading

th0ma7 commented Sep 18, 2020

ymartin59 commented Sep 19, 2020

th0ma7 commented Sep 20, 2020

BenjV commented Sep 20, 2020

th0ma7 commented Sep 21, 2020 • edited Loading

ymartin59 commented Sep 21, 2020

Safihre commented Sep 21, 2020

th0ma7 commented Oct 10, 2020

ymartin59 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

ymartin59 Oct 11, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

hgy59 Oct 11, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

ymartin59 Oct 11, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

hgy59 Oct 11, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

hgy59 commented Oct 11, 2020

hgy59 commented Oct 11, 2020

hgy59 commented Oct 11, 2020

th0ma7 commented Sep 1, 2020 •

edited by hgy59

Loading

publicarray commented Sep 13, 2020 •

edited

Loading

publicarray commented Sep 15, 2020 •

edited

Loading

publicarray commented Sep 18, 2020 •

edited

Loading

th0ma7 commented Sep 21, 2020 •

edited

Loading