Re: F41 Change Proposal: Disable openSSL Engine Support (system-wide)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Fri, Mar 08, 2024 at 08:37:19PM +0000, Aoife Moloney wrote:
> Wiki - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/OpensslNoEngine
> 
> This is a proposed Change for Fedora Linux.
> This document represents a proposed Change. As part of the Changes
> process, proposals are publicly announced in order to receive
> community feedback. This proposal will only be implemented if approved
> by the Fedora Engineering Steering Committee.
> 
> == Summary ==
> We disable support of engines in OpenSSL
> 
> == Owner ==
> * Name: [[User:Dbelyavs| Dmitry Belyavskiy]]
> * Email: dbelyavs@xxxxxxxxxx
> 
> == Detailed Description ==
> We are going to build OpenSSL without engine support. Engines are not
> FIPS compatible and corresponding API is deprecated since OpenSSL 3.0.
> The engine functionality we are aware of (PKCS#11, TPM) is either
> covered by providers or will be covered soon.

"will be covered soon"

... so lets wait until that work is actually complete before
removing this from openssl, otherwise there's a window of
brokenness in Fedora where the old feature is removed and
the new feature is not ready.

> == Benefit to Fedora ==
> We get rid of deprecated functionality and enforce using up-to-date
> API. Engine support is deprecated in OpenSSL upstream, and after
> provider migration caused some deficiencies with engine support. No
> new features will be added to the engine. So we reduce the maintenance
> burden and potentially attack surface.

What is upstream's intention with the 'engine' feature deprecation ?

Are they going actively remove this functionality after some
period of deprecation ? If so what's upstream timeframe, and
should Fedora just wait for that, rather than jumping the
gun ?


> == Upgrade/compatibility impact ==
> OpenSSL engines will no longer be supported. Engines will not be
> supported in openssl configuration files (presumably silently
> ignored). Users will have to reconfigure systems to providers if they
> use engines.
> 
> 
> == How To Test ==
> OpenSSL libcrypto.so doesn't export any ENGINE_* symbols (~120 lines).
> Application is normally built.

Removing symbols is an ABI break, so would imply the need for
an SONAME version bump. This is not normally something that
downstreams should ever touch though - it is an upstream
decision when to bump their SONAME version.

Should we not preserve the ENGINE_* symbols, but turn
their impl into either a no-op, or reporting a runtime
error, as appropriate for each API.


With regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: https://berrange.com      -o-    https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
|: https://libvirt.org         -o-            https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
|: https://entangle-photo.org    -o-    https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|
--
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux