Draft
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Spotted some wraparound issues with our time-point parsing code. We use
std::system_clock, which usesint64to store nanoseconds from 1970. As such, the range of representable time points is surprisingly perceivable:This specifically causes problems for certs with Not-Before or Not-After timestamps a few hundred years away - if they're after 2262, they wrap around and we get bugs.
This includes some new tests, in both crypto unit test and e2e cert auth, that exhibit these bugs.
There's also a proposed fix, shifting to tracking
secondsrather thanstd::system_clock::time_points. This has a little more churn on the implementation than I'd like, so I'll also explore just defining our own clock type.