Things removed:
* features.EmbedSCTs (and all the associated RA/CA/ocsp-updater code etc)
* ca.enablePrecertificateFlow (and all the associated RA/CA code)
* sa.AddSCTReceipt and sa.GetSCTReceipt RPCs
* publisher.SubmitToCT and publisher.SubmitToSingleCT RPCs
Fixes#3755.
Now that #3638 has been deployed to all of the RA instances there are no
more RPC clients using the SA's `CountCertificatesRange` RPC.
This commit deletes the implementation, the RPC definition & wrappers,
and all the test code/mocks.
Previously we introduced the concept of a "pending orders per account
ID" rate limit. After struggling with making an implementation of this
rate limit perform well we reevaluated the problem and decided a "new
orders per account per time window" rate limit would be a better fit for
ACMEv2 overall.
This commit introduces the new newOrdersPerAccount rate limit. The RA
now checks this before creating new pending orders in ra.NewOrder. It
does so after order reuse takes place ensuring the rate limit is only
applied in cases when a distinct new pending order row would be created.
To accomplish this a migration for a new orders field (created) and an
index over created and registrationID is added. It would be possible to
use the existing expires field for this like we've done in the past, but that
was primarily to avoid running a migration on a large table in prod. Since
we don't have that problem yet for V2 tables we can Do The Right Thing
and add a column.
For deployability the deprecated pendingOrdersPerAccount code & SA
gRPC bits are left around. A follow-up PR will be needed to remove
those (#3502).
Resolves#3410
This commit resolves the case where an error during finalization occurs.
Prior to this commit if an error (expected or otherwise) occurred after
setting an order to status processing at the start of order
finalization the order would be stuck processing forever.
The SA now has a `SetOrderError` RPC that can be used by the RA to
persist an error onto an order. The order status calculation can use
this error to decide if the order is invalid. The WFE is updated to
write the error to the order JSON when displaying the order information.
Prior to this commit the order protobuf had the error field as
a `[]byte`. It doesn't seem like this is the right decision, we have
a specific protobuf type for ProblemDetails and so this commit switches
the error field to use it. The conversion to/from `[]byte` is done with
the model by the SA.
An integration test is included that prior to this commit left an order
in a stuck processing state. With this commit the integration test
passes as expected.
Resolves https://github.com/letsencrypt/boulder/issues/3403
The SA RPC previously called `GetOrderAuthorizations` only returns
**valid, unexpired** authorizations. This commit updates the name to
emphasize that it only returns valid order authzs.
This change adds a feature flag, TLSSNIRevalidation. When it is enabled, Boulder
will create new authorization objects with TLS-SNI challenges if the requesting
account has issued a certificate with the relevant domain name, and was the most
recent account to do so*. This setting overrides the configured list of
challenges in the PolicyAuthority, so even if TLS-SNI is disabled in general, it
will be enabled for revalidation.
Note that this interacts with EnforceChallengeDisable. Because
EnforceChallengeDisable causes additional checked at validation time and at
issuance time, we need to update those two places as well. We'll send a
follow-up PR with that.
*We chose to make this work only for the most recent account to issue, even if
there were overlapping certificates, because it significantly simplifies the
database access patterns and should work for 95+% of cases.
Note that this change will let an account revalidate and reissue for a domain
even if the previous issuance on that account used http-01 or dns-01. This also
simplifies implementation, and fits within the intent of the mitigation plan: If
someone previously issued for a domain using http-01, we have high confidence
that they are actually the owner, and they are not going to "steal" the domain
from themselves using tls-sni-01.
Also note: This change also doesn't work properly with ReusePendingAuthz: true.
Specifically, if you attempted issuance in the last couple days and failed
because there was no tls-sni challenge, you'll still have an http-01 challenge
lying around, and we'll reuse that; then your client will fail due to lack of
tls-sni challenge again.
This change was joint work between @rolandshoemaker and @jsha.
This commit adds pending order reuse. Subsequent to this commit multiple
add-order requests from the same account ID for the same set of order
names will result in only one order being created. Orders are only
reused while they are not expired. Finalized orders will not be reused
for subsequent new-order requests allowing for duplicate order issuance.
Note that this is a second level of reuse, building on the pending
authorization reuse that's done between separate orders already.
To efficiently find an appropriate order ID given a set of names,
a registration ID, and the current time a new orderFqdnSets table is
added with appropriate indexes and foreign keys.
Resolves#3258
This commit adds a new rate limit to restrict the number of outstanding
pending orders per account. If the threshold for this rate limit is
crossed subsequent new-order requests will return a 429 response.
Note: Since this the rate limit object itself defines an `Enabled()`
test based on whether or not it has been configured there is **not**
a feature flag for this change.
Resolves https://github.com/letsencrypt/boulder/issues/3246
This PR implements order finalization for the ACME v2 API.
In broad strokes this means:
* Removing the CSR from order objects & the new-order flow
* Adding identifiers to the order object & new-order
* Providing a finalization URL as part of orders returned by new-order
* Adding support to the WFE's Order endpoint to receive finalization POST requests with a CSR
* Updating the RA to accept finalization requests and to ensure orders are fully validated before issuance can proceed
* Updating the SA to allow finding order authorizations & updating orders.
* Updating the CA to accept an Order ID to log when issuing a certificate corresponding to an order object
Resolves#3123
Roland Bracewell Shoemaker