Add an `identifier` field to the `va.PerformValidationRequest` proto, which will soon replace its `dnsName` field.
Accept and prefer the `identifier` field in every VA function that uses this struct. Don't (yet) assume it will be present.
Throughout the VA, accept and handle the IP address identifier type. Handling is similar to DNS names, except that `getAddrs` is not called, and consider that:
- IPs are represented in a different field in the `x509.Certificate` struct.
- IPs must be presented as reverse DNS (`.arpa`) names in SNI for [TLS-ALPN-01 challenge requests](https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8738#name-tls-with-application-layer-).
- IPv6 addresses are enclosed in square brackets when composing or parsing URLs.
For HTTP-01 challenges, accept redirects to bare IP addresses, which were previously rejected.
Fixes#2706
Part of #7311
Replace DCV and CAA checks (PerformValidation and IsCAAValid) in
va/va.go and va/caa.go with their MPIC compliant counterparts (DoDCV and
DoCAA) in va/vampic.go. Deprecate EnforceMultiCAA and EnforceMPIC and
default code paths as though they are both true. Require that RIR and
Perspective be set for primary and remote VAs.
Fixes#7965Fixes#7819
Today, we have VA.PerformValidation, a method called by the RA at
challenge time to perform DCV and check CAA. We also have VA.IsCAAValid,
a method invoked by the RA at finalize time when a CAA re-check is
necessary. Both of these methods can be executed on remote VA
perspectives by calling the generic VA.performRemoteValidation.
This change splits VA.PerformValidation into VA.DoDCV and VA.DoCAA,
which are both called on remote VA perspectives by calling the generic
VA.doRemoteOperation. VA.DoDCV, VA.DoCAA, and VA.doRemoteOperation
fulfill the requirements of SC-067 V3: Require Multi-Perspective
Issuance Corroboration by:
- Requiring at least three distinct perspectives, as outlined in the
"Phased Implementation Timeline" in BRs section 3.2.2.9 ("Effective
March 15, 2025").
- Ensuring that the number of non-corroborating (failing) perspectives
remains below the threshold defined by the "Table: Quorum Requirements"
in BRs section 3.2.2.9.
- Ensuring that corroborating (passing) perspectives reside in at least
2 distinct Regional Internet Registries (RIRs) per the "Phased
Implementation Timeline" in BRs section 3.2.2.9 ("Effective March 15,
2026").
- Including an MPIC summary consisting of: passing perspectives, failing
perspectives, passing RIRs, and a quorum met for issuance (e.g., 2/3 or
3/3) in each validation audit log event, per BRs Section 5.4.1,
Requirement 2.8.
When the new SeparateDCVAndCAAChecks feature flag is enabled on the RA,
calls to VA.IsCAAValid (during finalization) and VA.PerformValidation
(during challenge) are replaced with calls to VA.DoCAA and a sequence of
VA.DoDCV followed by VA.DoCAA, respectively.
Fixes#7612Fixes#7614Fixes#7615Fixes#7616
- Make performRemoteValidation a more generic function that returns a
new remoteResult interface
- Modify the return value of IsCAAValid and PerformValidation to satisfy
the remoteResult interface
- Include compile time checks and tests that pass an arbitrary operation
- Add `Perspective` and `RIR` fields to the remote-va configuration
- Configure RVA ValidationAuthorityImpl instances with the contents of
the JSON configuration
- Configure VA ValidationAuthorityImpl instances with the constant
`va.PrimaryPerspective`
- Log `Perspective` for non-Primary Perspectives, per the MPIC
requirements in section 5.4.1 (2) vii of the BRs. Also log the RIR for
posterity.
- Introduce `ValidationResult` RPC fields `Perspective` and `Rir`, which
are not currently used but will be required for corroboration in #7616
Fixes https://github.com/letsencrypt/boulder/issues/7613
Part of https://github.com/letsencrypt/boulder/issues/7615
Part of https://github.com/letsencrypt/boulder/issues/7616
Find all gRPC fields which represent DNS Names -- sometimes called
"identifier", "hostname", "domain", "identifierValue", or other things
-- and unify their naming. This naming makes it very clear that these
values are strings which may be included in the SAN extension of a
certificate with type dnsName.
As we move towards issuing IP Address certificates, all of these fields
will need to be replaced by fields which carry both an identifier type
and value, not just a single name. This unified naming makes it very
clear which messages and methods need to be updated to support
non-dnsName identifiers.
Part of https://github.com/letsencrypt/boulder/issues/7647
The core.Challenge.ProvidedKeyAuthorization field is problematic, both
because it is poorly named (which is admittedly easily fixable) and
because it is a field which we never expose to the client yet it is held
on a core type. Deprecate this field, and replace it with a new
vapb.PerformValidationRequest.ExpectedKeyAuthorization field.
Within the VA, this also simplifies the primary logic methods to just
take the expected key authorization, rather than taking a whole (largely
unnecessary) challenge object. This has large but wholly mechanical
knock-on effects on the unit tests.
While we're here, improve the documentation on core.Challenge itself,
and remove Challenge.URI, which was deprecated long ago and is wholly
unused.
Part of https://github.com/letsencrypt/boulder/issues/7514
This updates va.proto to use proto3 syntax, and updates
all clients of the autogenerated code to use the new types.
In particular, it removes indirection from built-in types
(proto3 uses ints, rather than pointers to ints, for example).
Depends on #5003Fixes#4956
Our proto files had a variety of indentation styles: 2 spaces,
4 spaces, 8 spaces, and tabs; sometimes mixed within the same
file. The proto3 style guide[1] says to use 2-space indents,
so this change standardizes on that.
[1] https://developers.google.com/protocol-buffers/docs/style
This updates va.proto to use proto3 syntax, and updates
all clients of the autogenerated code to use the new types. In
particular, it removes indirection from built-in types (proto3
uses ints, rather than pointers to ints, for example).
Fixes#4956
There are some changes to the code generated in the latest version, so
this modifies every .pb.go file.
Also, the way protoc-gen-go decides where to put files has changed, so
each generate.go gets the --go_opt=paths=source_relative flag to
tell protoc to continue placing output next to the input.
Remove staticcheck from build.sh; we get it via golangci-lint now.
Pass --no-document to gem install fpm; this is recommended in the fpm docs.
This adds support for the account-uri CAA parameter as specified by
section 3 of https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-acme-caa-04, allowing
issuance to be restricted to one or more ACME accounts as specified by CAA
records.
When performing CAA checking respect the validation-methods parameter (if
present) and restrict the allowed authorization methods to those specified.
This allows a domain to restrict authorization methods that can be used with
Let's Encrypt.
This is largely based on PR #3003 (by @lukaslihotzki), which was landed and
then later reverted due to issue #3143. The bug the resulted in the previous
code being reverted has been addressed (likely inadvertently) by 76973d0f.
This implementation also includes integration tests for CAA validation-methods.
Fixes issue #3143.
This commit implements RFC 6844's description of the "CAA issuewild
property" for CAA records.
We check CAA in two places: at the time of validation, and at the time
of issuance when an authorization is more than 8hours old. Both
locations have been updated to properly enforce issuewild when checking
CAA for a domain corresponding to a wildcard name in a certificate
order.
Resolves https://github.com/letsencrypt/boulder/issues/3211
This commit adds CAA `issue` paramter parsing and the `challenge` parameter to permit a single challenge type only. By setting `challenge=dns-01`, the nameserver keeps control over every issued certificate.
Fixes#2889.
VA now implements two gRPC services: VA and CAA. These both run on the same port, but this allows implementation of the IsCAAValid RPC to skip using the gRPC wrappers, and makes it easier to potentially separate the service into its own package in the future.
RA.NewCertificate now checks the expiration times of authorizations, and will call out to VA to recheck CAA for those authorizations that were not validated recently enough.
James Renken