Closed
Bug 449394
Opened 16 years ago
Closed 15 years ago
Enable WellsSecure Public Root Certificate Authority root for EV
Categories
(Core :: Security: PSM, enhancement)
Core
Security: PSM
Tracking
()
RESOLVED
FIXED
People
(Reporter: hecker, Assigned: KaiE)
References
Details
Attachments
(6 files, 3 obsolete files)
Per bug 428390 I have approved the request from Wells Fargo to enable its WellsSecure Public Root Certificate Authority root certificate for EV use. Please make the corresponding changes to PSM. The relevant information is as follows: Name: WellsSecure Public Root Certificate Authority SHA-1 fingerprint: E7 B4 F6 9D 61 EC 90 69 DB 7E 90 A7 40 1A 3C F4 7D 4F E8 EE EV policy OID: 2.16.840.1.114171.500.9 Gordon, can you please do a final confirmation that this is the correct root and the correct EV policy OID?
Assignee | ||
Comment 1•16 years ago
|
||
Can you please provide an URL to a live Web Site that uses an EV certificate issued by this root?
Assignee | ||
Comment 2•16 years ago
|
||
No feedback, no inclusion.
Assignee | ||
Comment 3•16 years ago
|
||
Gordon provided a test URL in bug 449393 comment 9: https://nerys.wellsfargo.com/test.html Unfortunately I ran into a problem with testing that URL. I am not yet sure whether the issue is related to a problem in NSS, or whether it is caused by a bad configuration on the WellsSecure OCSP server. As part of the EV validation, NSS attempts to use OCSP to obtain the status of the server certificate. That operation fails.
Assignee | ||
Comment 4•16 years ago
|
||
Gordon, based on my quick tests, it appears to me that your OCSP server is misconfigured. NSS is unable to verify the certificate that signs the OCSP response, because NSS is unable to find the issuer certificate for the signing cert. Gordon, could you please verify that your OCSP server does send out all required intermediate certificates when sending out OCSP responses?
Assignee | ||
Comment 5•16 years ago
|
||
we are sending an OCSP request for: ## SUBJECT: CN=nerys.wellsfargo.com,OU=CAST PKI,O=Wells Fargo and Company,serialNumber=3511,OID.2.5.4.9=1300 W. Alameda Dr.,L=Tempe,ST=AZ,postalCode=85282,C=US,OID.1.3.6.1.4.1.311.60.2.1.3=US ## VALIDITY: Fr Apr 25 02:23:18 2008 to Sa Apr 25 02:23:15 2009 ## ISSUER: CN=Wells Fargo Public Primary Certificate Authority,OU=Wells Fargo Certificate Authorities,O=Wells Fargo,C=US ## SERIAL NUMBER: 03:39 ## requested validity time: Mo Aug 18 22:44:55 2008 we get a response. there are not certs in the response we attempt to find the signer certificate (that signed the response) (gdb) print encodedName $3 = {type = 3031855128, data = 0xb0c77241 "0|1\v0\t\006\003U\004\006\023\002US1\0200\016\006\003U\004\b\023\aArizona1\0160\f\006\003U\004\a\023\005Tempe1\0240\022\006\003U\004\n\023\vWells Fargo1\r0\v\006\003U\004\v\023\004CAST1&0$\006\003U\004\003\023\035Wells Fargo Default Responder\030\01720080818224456Z0R0P0;0\t\006\005+\016\003\002\032\005", len = 126} signerCert = CERT_FindCertByName(handle, &encodedName); this fails, nothing found and without the signer cert, we can't validate the signature
Assignee | ||
Comment 6•16 years ago
|
||
The OCSP request was sent to http://validator.wellsfargo.com/ and we got a response with http code 200 (good). I'm trying to find that responder cert somewhere, so I could import it, and try again. If that succeeded, it would confirm the problem is the missing cert.
Assignee | ||
Comment 7•16 years ago
|
||
Certificate: Data: Version: 3 (0x2) Serial Number: 825 (0x339) Signature Algorithm: PKCS #1 SHA-1 With RSA Encryption Issuer: "CN=Wells Fargo Public Primary Certificate Authority,OU=Wells Fargo Certificate Authorities,O=Wells Fargo,C=US" Validity: Not Before: Fri Apr 25 02:23:18 2008 Not After : Sat Apr 25 02:23:15 2009 Subject: "CN=nerys.wellsfargo.com,OU=CAST PKI,O=Wells Fargo and Compa ny,serialNumber=3511,OID.2.5.4.9=1300 W. Alameda Dr.,L=Tempe,ST=A Z,postalCode=85282,C=US,OID.1.3.6.1.4.1.311.60.2.1.3=US" Subject Public Key Info: Public Key Algorithm: PKCS #1 RSA Encryption RSA Public Key: Modulus: a1:a5:cb:91:56:26:2c:d7:45:75:e9:02:43:47:64:00: fc:76:ec:21:ac:cc:6b:04:00:6c:07:f7:ce:c7:3d:41: a1:37:64:f6:7a:7b:4b:07:55:98:f4:51:56:c2:24:d9: 7f:75:79:96:fa:4c:b3:56:13:16:68:8f:7a:2b:b5:31: 0c:29:f9:7b:aa:14:ff:c6:57:9e:7c:88:7a:e2:fd:3e: 8f:ae:07:03:44:84:71:44:cd:af:89:d7:36:38:32:39: 69:e3:01:8a:c2:6e:77:b9:27:5a:05:fa:64:0d:0a:a6: ff:01:ed:51:a2:53:48:f3:07:8f:6d:d9:c7:7e:5f:f5 Exponent: 65537 (0x10001) Signed Extensions: Name: Certificate Basic Constraints Critical: True Data: Is not a CA. Name: Certificate Subject Alt Name DNS name: "nerys.wellsfargo.com" Name: Authority Information Access Method: PKIX Online Certificate Status Protocol Location: URI: "http://validator.wellsfargo.com/" Method: PKIX CA issuers access method Location: URI: "http://crl.pki.wellsfargo.com/wf_ev_00.crt" Name: Certificate Policies Data: Policy Name: OID.2.16.840.1.114171.500.0.0 Policy Qualifier Name: PKIX CPS Pointer Qualifier Policy Qualifier Data: "http://www.wellsfargo.com/cps/" Policy Name: OID.2.16.840.1.114171.500.9 Policy Qualifier Name: PKIX CPS Pointer Qualifier Policy Qualifier Data: "http://www.wellsfargo.com/cps/" Name: Certificate Key Usage Critical: True Usages: Digital Signature Key Encipherment Name: Extended Key Usage TLS Web Server Authentication Certificate Name: Certificate Authority Key Identifier Key ID: d1:83:86:3a:6c:43:0a:87:0c:db:7f:9c:a7:76:a9:24: 4f:cf:16:9a Name: CRL Distribution Points URI: "http://crl.pki.wellsfargo.com/ev.crl" Name: Certificate Subject Key ID Data: 0e:e4:65:e9:61:6e:ed:d7:6b:3c:82:52:db:9b:15:f0: 64:79:04:24 Signature Algorithm: PKCS #1 SHA-1 With RSA Encryption Signature: 12:3a:48:d5:84:18:98:d1:fd:92:10:f1:87:3a:6c:96: 3f:c9:52:ff:45:db:7d:cb:d2:2a:c6:df:d1:2f:13:17: 5f:b4:6a:ec:29:21:8f:5c:4d:46:5c:c0:e2:4d:0d:de: 4b:60:99:6e:2c:57:50:d3:d5:c9:c9:5b:78:d8:53:55: 5c:91:54:4e:91:c9:f7:98:5a:98:b6:bd:ff:4c:32:20: 62:15:44:f9:e1:4e:21:0e:8f:af:ff:08:d2:0a:36:84: a7:d6:ee:2a:73:9a:00:90:3d:12:35:a9:6c:ac:33:4a: 9f:e0:96:39:0b:50:df:d8:a8:87:ad:70:90:f0:04:49: 2d:29:23:1b:46:19:87:58:86:95:ed:be:3a:d0:98:98: f6:34:49:ff:4b:dd:e6:b5:03:97:5b:c3:19:da:76:8e: 7f:90:30:b8:de:29:5e:2a:82:d2:08:ee:ce:c6:f9:3d: 31:47:0e:68:22:2e:e1:5e:67:82:2a:12:e0:a1:04:a4: 5a:18:57:1c:ad:71:5d:10:48:1a:b5:7e:1e:19:6e:6f: 19:66:fe:b8:71:05:47:b8:dc:e5:61:1f:63:38:25:a9: 97:a8:84:f1:79:c4:fa:02:14:35:dc:a7:13:6c:fd:94: 35:38:ef:ce:6a:2d:6f:5a:ea:5c:40:99:7e:89:53:31 Fingerprint (MD5): FD:75:1E:76:B0:2F:44:16:2B:91:D2:EB:C2:16:2A:15 Fingerprint (SHA1): 47:B4:6B:C2:AB:EE:5E:D4:1A:EA:F1:B0:67:A5:FB:D7:23:52:EF:56 $ ./ocspclnt -r ws -d ~/.mozilla/firefox/pdtq476d.trunktest/ > r $ ./ocspclnt -p -d ~/.mozilla/firefox/pdtq476d.trunktest/ < r TBS Request: Version: DEFAULT No Requestor Name. Request 0: Cert ID: Hash Algorithm: SHA-1 Issuer Name Hash: 73:05:93:df:0a:6d:fd:d6:87:4e:e3:d6:14:56:0c:5c: 59:38:7a:c7 Issuer Key Hash: d1:83:86:3a:6c:43:0a:87:0c:db:7f:9c:a7:76:a9:24: 4f:cf:16:9a Serial Number: 825 (0x339) No Single Request Extensions No Request Extensions No Signature $ ./ocspclnt -R ws -d ~/.mozilla/firefox/pdtq476d.trunktest/ > R $ ./ocspclnt -P -d ~/.mozilla/firefox/pdtq476d.trunktest/ < R Response Status: successful (Response has valid confirmations) Response Bytes: Response Type: OCSP Basic Response Basic OCSP Response: Response Data: Version: DEFAULT Responder ID (byName): Name: "CN=Wells Fargo Default Responder,OU=CAST,O=Wells Fargo ,L=Tempe,ST=Arizona,C=US" Produced At: Mon Aug 18 23:09:00 2008 Response 0: Cert ID: Hash Algorithm: SHA-1 Issuer Name Hash: 73:05:93:df:0a:6d:fd:d6:87:4e:e3:d6:14:56:0c:5c: 59:38:7a:c7 Issuer Key Hash: d1:83:86:3a:6c:43:0a:87:0c:db:7f:9c:a7:76:a9:24: 4f:cf:16:9a Serial Number: 825 (0x339) Status: Cert is unknown to responder. This Update: Mon Aug 18 23:09:00 2008 No Next Update No Single Response Extensions No Response Extensions Signature Algorithm: PKCS #1 SHA-1 With RSA Encryption Signature: 19:6d:83:39:dc:88:b3:24:33:31:28:89:79:13:0b:37: 8d:77:04:7e:41:4d:f4:04:d8:f6:c8:3a:41:4c:d9:fd: f0:75:40:4e:92:2f:f1:d0:0b:eb:93:a0:be:c3:88:24: 6a:4e:98:d8:91:de:82:f7:60:c4:b0:b5:35:27:66:aa: 71:12:a1:5e:30:cd:79:2a:19:60:56:b6:7e:dc:71:af: 83:25:0d:fb:8f:54:31:56:4e:f0:69:be:c2:85:a6:75: 06:31:a0:d7:bd:eb:17:f3:7b:63:71:2b:12:54:78:49: e0:64:b6:23:49:ac:2f:5b:65:5e:74:ad:cf:98:55:f9 No Certificates. Signature verification failed: security library: bad database.
Comment 8•16 years ago
|
||
Kai, please attach to this bug the file named 'R' from the experiment recorded in comment 7. Thanks.
Assignee | ||
Comment 9•16 years ago
|
||
Assignee | ||
Comment 10•16 years ago
|
||
Assignee | ||
Comment 11•16 years ago
|
||
Assignee | ||
Comment 12•16 years ago
|
||
I've been given this certificate by email.
Assignee | ||
Comment 13•16 years ago
|
||
This looks very wrong to me. - the certificate that signs the OCSP responses is missing, the OCSP server fails to send it out - the certificate that signs the OCSP responses is a self signed cert, but it ought to be a cert that chains up to a CA cert. In fact, according to my understanding, it must chain up to the very same CA root cert that issued the cert we have requested to validate. - for testing purposes, I assigned explicit trust to the response signer cert - after I assigned the trust, I repeated the OCSP validation attempt - now I get a different error message: The OCSP server has no status for the certificate. (Error code: sec_error_ocsp_unknown_cert) In other words, your OCSP server (the one listed in your server cert) has no clue whether the requested cert is valid or not. And the response that says so ("have no clue") can not be validated by the client. I believe this proofs the theory that EV can not work, because of a misconfigured OCSP infrastructure. I propose to delay enabling EV until you have shown that your OCSP setup works.
Assignee | ||
Comment 14•16 years ago
|
||
In order to help you with testing your OCSP infrastructure, here is some advice: Get the latest nightly experimental Firefox 3 build from here: ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/nightly/latest-mozilla1.9.0/ It should already contain your root, but not enabled for EV. Go to advanced preferences, encryption, validation, and check the checkbox that says "When an OCSP server connection fails, treat the certificate as invalid". Then connect to your own test site at https://nerys.wellsfargo.com/test.html Please report back when you have reconfigured your infrastructure and Firefox can successfully connect with the above option set, or, when you have reason to believe that Firefox is behaving incorrectly.
Comment 15•16 years ago
|
||
See RFC 2560 section 4.2.2.2 for the requirements on an OCSP response signer's certificate. In short: the response signer's cert must be either the CA cert that issued the cert being checked, or a delegated responder cert issued by that same CA. (I'm ignoring the "local configuration" case.) If the response is signed by a delegated responder, and not by the CA itself (that is, if the response signature is verified using the public key from a delegated responder's certificate, and not using the public key from the CA's certificate) then the response signer's certificate is not optional. The response must include it (except for the "local configuration" case, which I'm ignoring).
Comment 16•16 years ago
|
||
Nelson, Kai, Thank you for your comments. I am looking into our configuration and will post what I find.
Assignee | ||
Comment 17•16 years ago
|
||
Removing link to bug 451305, as this root is not ready for inclusion in FF 3.0.4
No longer depends on: ev303
Comment 18•16 years ago
|
||
We are still interested in EV Inclusion and we are working with our vendor to resolve any OCSP issues.
Assignee | ||
Comment 19•16 years ago
|
||
(In reply to comment #18) > We are still interested in EV Inclusion and we are working with our vendor to > resolve any OCSP issues. Please let us know in this bug once you're ready, and we can resume testing and re-attempt inclusion. Thanks.
Comment 20•16 years ago
|
||
Kai, Sorry for the delay in resolving this, we believe that we have resolved the issue we were experiencing with our OCSP responder and are ready to resume testing at this time. You can still use our test site: https://nerys.wellsfargo.com/test.html for testing purposes. We look forward to your feedback.
Assignee | ||
Comment 21•16 years ago
|
||
I attempted again to grant EV to your root. It fails again, now with a different error.
Assignee | ||
Comment 22•16 years ago
|
||
Attachment #334432 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #334434 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Assignee | ||
Comment 23•16 years ago
|
||
I used certutil -A -n ws -d ~/.mozilla/firefox/pdtq476d.trunktest/ -i /tmp/nerys.wellsfargo.com -a -t ,, to import the cert into a NSS database.
Assignee | ||
Comment 24•16 years ago
|
||
$ ./ocspclnt -r ws -d ~/.mozilla/firefox/pdtq476d.trunktest/ > r $ ./ocspclnt -p -d ~/.mozilla/firefox/pdtq476d.trunktest/ < r TBS Request: Version: DEFAULT No Requestor Name. Request 0: Cert ID: Hash Algorithm: SHA-1 Issuer Name Hash: 73:05:93:df:0a:6d:fd:d6:87:4e:e3:d6:14:56:0c:5c: 59:38:7a:c7 Issuer Key Hash: 26:61:85:72:eb:b2:96:ae:d3:f4:15:5f:04:31:b5:89: 81:cb:40:d9 Serial Number: 1206 (0x4b6) No Single Request Extensions No Request Extensions No Signature
Assignee | ||
Comment 25•16 years ago
|
||
$ ./ocspclnt -R ws -d ~/.mozilla/firefox/pdtq476d.trunktest/ > R
Assignee | ||
Comment 26•16 years ago
|
||
The dump finishes with: Signature verification failed: Invalid OCSP signing certificate in OCSP response.
Assignee | ||
Comment 27•16 years ago
|
||
I don't know whether this result means the wellssecure ocsp responder is still incorrect, or whether this is a bug in NSS. I propose Alexei/Nelson have a look at the files I've attached. If they conclude that NSS behaves correctly, then the WellsSecure engineers should use the NSS tools and repeat the tests illustrated in this bug, and enhance their server environment until the tests work, or until they are able to report a bug in NSS.
Assignee | ||
Updated•16 years ago
|
Attachment #366840 -
Attachment description: test dump of new R → text dump of new R
Assignee | ||
Comment 28•16 years ago
|
||
I'm going to produce a Firefox test build that includes the EV blessing for the WellsSecure root. { // CN=WellsSecure Public Root Certificate Authority,OU=Wells Fargo Bank NA,O=Wells Fargo WellsSecure,C=US "2.16.840.1.114171.500.9", "WellsSecure EV OID", SEC_OID_UNKNOWN, "E7:B4:F6:9D:61:EC:90:69:DB:7E:90:A7:40:1A:3C:F4:7D:4F:E8:EE", "MIGFMQswCQYDVQQGEwJVUzEgMB4GA1UECgwXV2VsbHMgRmFyZ28gV2VsbHNTZWN1" "cmUxHDAaBgNVBAsME1dlbGxzIEZhcmdvIEJhbmsgTkExNjA0BgNVBAMMLVdlbGxz" "U2VjdXJlIFB1YmxpYyBSb290IENlcnRpZmljYXRlIEF1dGhvcml0eQ==", "AQ==", nsnull }, I'll let you know when this build is done. Hopefully it will allow us to avoid further experiments until you are able to report a successful test with your test servers and that test build.
Assignee | ||
Comment 29•16 years ago
|
||
Ok, looks like this is a bug in NSS. For testing purposes, when calling into the NSS libpkix verification function, I disabled the CRL check, and only requested OCSP. This gave me valid EV. I recently saw a report in a different bug that NSS reports a failure for certificates that list both CRLDP and OCSP AIA, and the server cert is such a cert listing both.
Comment 30•16 years ago
|
||
(In reply to comment #29) > I recently saw a report in a different bug that NSS reports a failure for > certificates that list both CRLDP and OCSP AIA, I'm not aware of any such bug.
Assignee | ||
Comment 31•16 years ago
|
||
(In reply to comment #30) > (In reply to comment #29) > > I recently saw a report in a different bug that NSS reports a failure for > > certificates that list both CRLDP and OCSP AIA, > > I'm not aware of any such bug. I was referring to comments in bug 477244 comment 67. But that comment has not been verified. My reference was a guess. Meanwhile I have done more testing on this WellsSecure issue. I've now used the most recent snapshot of NSS to avoid confusion. I'll explain the new findings in the next comments.
Assignee | ||
Comment 32•16 years ago
|
||
EV verification fails as soon as we attempt to use OCSP to validate the intermediate cert. Here is a dump of the response received when asking the OCSP responder for information about the intermediate cert "WellsFargoPublicPrimaryCertificateAuthority". Response Status: successful (Response has valid confirmations) Response Bytes: Response Type: OCSP Basic Response Basic OCSP Response: Response Data: Version: DEFAULT Responder ID (byName): Name: "CN=Wells Fargo Default Responder,OU=CAST,O=Wells Fargo ,L=Tempe,ST=Arizona,C=US" Produced At: Wed Mar 11 22:14:59 2009 Response 0: Cert ID: Hash Algorithm: SHA-1 Issuer Name Hash: 6e:bf:42:ee:b4:d0:d0:fa:0c:62:71:e9:73:80:bd:c3: e7:7b:40:ab Issuer Key Hash: 26:95:19:10:d9:e8:a1:97:91:ff:dc:19:d9:b5:04:3e: d2:73:0a:6a Serial Number: 413 (0x19d) Status: Cert is good. This Update: Thu Feb 26 17:33:24 2009 Next Update: Thu Mar 12 04:14:59 2009 No Single Response Extensions No Response Extensions Signature Algorithm: PKCS #1 SHA-1 With RSA Encryption Signature: 1b:38:c2:cb:91:d9:59:fa:a1:ac:4c:95:36:05:f9:92: 32:59:fc:6d:ec:1e:c0:9c:a9:58:86:b8:65:c8:78:93: 88:10:56:7a:df:00:f1:b7:3c:fd:2a:08:93:e9:24:7c: 78:ba:54:ac:9d:77:39:d0:0c:5b:54:40:20:8e:5a:10: ab:c6:c1:90:6e:f8:23:c3:29:be:a8:99:0a:a8:26:54: 53:7d:27:cb:c6:c9:65:b8:ba:ec:0a:86:f8:4a:ec:b2: 71:4c:da:a3:7f:4d:9f:36:16:43:49:e5:ed:88:cc:ef: de:1a:b1:ee:2e:c9:2d:02:ef:64:f3:c1:b9:e8:59:90 No Certificates. Signature verification failed: Unrecognized Object Identifier.
Comment 33•16 years ago
|
||
Kai, when the ocspclnt program is used like pp, to "pretty print" a request or response, it may misdiagnose the request or response because it lacks the information necessary to do correct diagnosis. For example, it is not possible to tell if the response has a valid signer or not by examining the response alone. It is necessary to also have the original cert chain for which the request was sent, as well as any "local" configuration of the "default" (user delegated) responder. Only the option that takes the name of a cert whose chain is in the cert DB and checks that can produce diagnostics that are consistent with the behavior seen in FF, IINM.
Assignee | ||
Comment 34•16 years ago
|
||
Nelson, in my tests I never use a user delegated/configured responder. I think that's a pretty rare configuration... I always use the "default behavior" of the tool, which I believe is, to use the responders listed in the certs. In my test that led to the output in comment 32, I used a cert database that has the built-in roots module added to it using modutil. When I used the pretty-print option from ocspclnt for the intermediate cert, my cert database contained that intermediate. And that intermediate is directly issued by one of the built-in roots. I believe the ocspclnt tool had all necessary certificates available when it produced the output in comment 33.
Assignee | ||
Comment 35•16 years ago
|
||
So, I would like to give the ball back to WellsSecure representatives. FYI, in regular SSL we use revocation testing on the leaf cert, only. However, for EV, we try to test the intermediate certs on the chain for revocation info, too. This is where we get a failure. @NSS team: I can reproduce this failure using vfychain. vfychain -d . -pp -a -u 1 -v -o OID.2.16.840.1.114171.500.9 -g leaf -h requireFreshInfo -m ocsp -s requireInfo -m crl -g chain -m ocsp nerys.wellsfargo.com Chain is bad, -8180 = Peer's Certificate has been revoked. PROBLEM WITH THE CERT CHAIN: CERT 2. Builtin Object Token:WellsSecure Public Root Certificate Authority [Certificate Authority]: ERROR -8180: Peer's Certificate has been revoked. vfychain -d . -pp -a -u 1 -v -o OID.2.16.840.1.114171.500.9 -g leaf -h requireFreshInfo -m ocsp -s requireInfo -m crl -g chain -m ocsp WellsFargoPublicPrimaryCertificateAuthority Chain is bad, -8180 = Peer's Certificate has been revoked. PROBLEM WITH THE CERT CHAIN: CERT 1. Builtin Object Token:WellsSecure Public Root Certificate Authority [Certificate Authority]: ERROR -8180: Peer's Certificate has been revoked. cert db contains roots module, nerys' server cert, and the intermediate cert, the same two certs I specified on the command line. I get the same behavior, specifying either a filename or a nickname for the certs already in the db.
Comment 36•16 years ago
|
||
the issuing CA was re-issued in order to support an issue re: cross certification with a legacy root. Please ensure that you are testing with the following intermediate certificate: Serial Number 01 9d Monday, September 15, 2008 2:56:03 PM Saturday, September 15, 2018 2:56:03 PM Also obtainable here: http://crl.pki.wellsfargo.com/wf_ev_00.crt -----BEGIN CERTIFICATE----- MIIFHDCCBASgAwIBAgICAZ0wDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQAwgYUxCzAJBgNVBAYTAlVT MSAwHgYDVQQKDBdXZWxscyBGYXJnbyBXZWxsc1NlY3VyZTEcMBoGA1UECwwTV2Vs bHMgRmFyZ28gQmFuayBOQTE2MDQGA1UEAwwtV2VsbHNTZWN1cmUgUHVibGljIFJv b3QgQ2VydGlmaWNhdGUgQXV0aG9yaXR5MB4XDTA4MDkxNTIxNTYwM1oXDTE4MDkx NTIxNTYwM1owgYwxCzAJBgNVBAYTAlVTMRQwEgYDVQQKEwtXZWxscyBGYXJnbzEs MCoGA1UECxMjV2VsbHMgRmFyZ28gQ2VydGlmaWNhdGUgQXV0aG9yaXRpZXMxOTA3 BgNVBAMTMFdlbGxzIEZhcmdvIFB1YmxpYyBQcmltYXJ5IENlcnRpZmljYXRlIEF1 dGhvcml0eTCCASIwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQADggEPADCCAQoCggEBAN/RQjD9MC8I k/SmQ4omM9Eck0dlOiACtIK/h+uSfdbEGFMZIHJ12wPNYsa+Bpj11KRZSthH6sRJ eRKivEI/cHd/Ya6+G4Ovrodvjp4qA4C+nBgnYSbitWlQDhWswMBcLQdUOh58qV7y jiKzN+RVZBdO0Dug2ZEVovFAUg+dtvPczFo8XXQgPKAH7SlDvisW2rT8h81pvWmB 5iPHoK6Zsk3PEUzLv/2HZiVtMQFCpZ3IbS/eIa30vm3HvhMlNNh1ww1sGk6TBVVQ /sTU4fkoWWKGJ+Pe64FnG9uOVulcQcKirWubibN0tvPPEqcTvXpLiyMagmfTZa65 Szupfm2SYkECAwEAAaOCAYswggGHMA8GA1UdEwEB/wQFMAMBAf8wcgYIKwYBBQUH AQEEZjBkMCwGCCsGAQUFBzABhiBodHRwOi8vdmFsaWRhdG9yLndlbGxzZmFyZ28u Y29tLzA0BggrBgEFBQcwAoYoaHR0cDovL2NybC5wa2kud2VsbHNmYXJnby5jb20v d3NwcmNhLmNydDCBuwYDVR0gBIGzMIGwMDkGC2CGSAGG+3uDdAAAMCowKAYIKwYB BQUHAgEWHGh0dHA6Ly93d3cud2VsbHNmYXJnby5jb20vY3AwOQYLYIZIAYb7e4N0 AAEwKjAoBggrBgEFBQcCARYcaHR0cDovL3d3dy53ZWxsc2ZhcmdvLmNvbS9jcDA4 BgpghkgBhvt7g3QJMCowKAYIKwYBBQUHAgEWHGh0dHA6Ly93d3cud2VsbHNmYXJn by5jb20vY3AwDgYDVR0PAQH/BAQDAgHGMB8GA1UdIwQYMBaAFCaVGRDZ6KGXkf/c Gdm1BD7ScwpqMBEGA1UdDgQKBAhEMbWJgctA2TANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQUFAAOCAQEA dYyusLRckUZlHyaOL1akdq9bAGpc1qr2+ZkCcjzYMuRY3/vMpPZD/++5iI688nDL ovg1ijMD8URQNdm+Ku9YW7hFcL40aO0KXLWn+wka/lxv5KF34UQwGsiKfXcZ/Dbz GQ8OtgXieACXg8QmQJlZKu7fEAvX12nwhX02GKrcsgBLcdiVLauzeY6O61pfPL6Z P+iwrVP2MaGKm1cxZG1Cmw7ZHPSDdwAWzYMt5hcg7eexXkm5MC6/EGXGfIxHe/W9 ++NCGL/X4/MWkvoaPh+7/ecn71yC4TfeM+REwBYjO8CuCepgxW/b/8FKU62fxB1s nI7viYaF/ru+3cndWupGzg== -----END CERTIFICATE----- Gordon Young Wells Fargo PKI Ops Team
Comment 37•16 years ago
|
||
As well please use this certificate to validate signatures on the OCSP responses re: EV_SSL -----BEGIN CERTIFICATE----- MIIEJTCCAw2gAwIBAgIBHzANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQUFADCBjDELMAkGA1UEBhMCVVMx FDASBgNVBAoTC1dlbGxzIEZhcmdvMSwwKgYDVQQLEyNXZWxscyBGYXJnbyBDZXJ0 aWZpY2F0ZSBBdXRob3JpdGllczE5MDcGA1UEAxMwV2VsbHMgRmFyZ28gUHVibGlj IFByaW1hcnkgQ2VydGlmaWNhdGUgQXV0aG9yaXR5MB4XDTA4MDkyOTIzMTYwMVoX DTExMDkyOTIzMTQzM1owaTEUMBIGA1UECgwLV2VsbHMgRmFyZ28xLDAqBgNVBAsM I1dlbGxzIEZhcmdvIENlcnRpZmljYXRlIEF1dGhvcml0aWVzMSMwIQYDVQQDDBpX ZWxscyBGYXJnbyBFVjAwIFJlc3BvbmRlcjCBnzANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOBjQAw gYkCgYEAv/TLtnFmM12hEBxrw79asGOx/Bz9/AzAKKPrTv/SAD/OzNzE3nIuhxPd r55VHVVyQISCbxRUyohTmHOeGuTi9lP1bPuHxGu7DYyjjg4szWmuE+VgUp5I+r5p O2I4lwjGRsfVnlNyUNAchMGY5BckiZfQrayxOt5aHt3c2scGKKUCAwEAAaOCATYw ggEyMAkGA1UdEwQCMAAwgYMGA1UdIAR8MHowOwYLYIZIAYb7e4N0AAAwLDAqBggr BgEFBQcCARYeaHR0cDovL3d3dy53ZWxsc2ZhcmdvLmNvbS9jcHMvMDsGC2CGSAGG +3uDdAABMCwwKgYIKwYBBQUHAgEWHmh0dHA6Ly93d3cud2VsbHNmYXJnby5jb20v Y3BzLzAPBgkrBgEFBQcwAQUEAgUAMA4GA1UdDwEB/wQEAwIGwDATBgNVHSUEDDAK BggrBgEFBQcDCTATBgNVHSMEDDAKgAhEMbWJgctA2TA1BgNVHR8ELjAsMCqgKKAm hiRodHRwOi8vY3JsLnBraS53ZWxsc2ZhcmdvLmNvbS9ldi5jcmwwHQYDVR0OBBYE FEfEF6CMIUE3WM57g+Yj2ZnJQ7YzMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBQUAA4IBAQAhdCa5JIhL hj2Wp5UD5o58OVZxqG/qdVtumOyhrIksPktOCV7LQ7g6+Iq85fuKQ2YfjiS12S0b HuOlI/BIu41sJ4r+y7GSX1jJgjah04eEDAMavtu79Qb+POsySy2/LDe023xZRfQi 4HIme54fAe6ueP1s6F3RKxzLJkWlRfshlBDb4R1KhwtCtr8ow82r8bj7QEEHAME+ PBiYAIzbmIS2AP3uL5NhF+pA6Rj2yfSpE46K1rW0oyypsG4rUqovVr+66oSpMyNo 9/ZrGvMex9eEvfx0zSZxn5mnl2UOCTEfw/3GWpuG1FgvoYDWdoZ94JM9YUGKxkKx EMtTz7/3D3wh -----END CERTIFICATE----- ~Gordon
Comment 38•16 years ago
|
||
Kai, it would be very useful if the error code could differ in case for intermediate CAs. Is this possible to implement within a useful time frame?
Assignee | ||
Comment 39•16 years ago
|
||
(In reply to comment #37) > As well please use this certificate to validate signatures on the OCSP > responses re: EV_SSL I don't quite understand. Why am I required to manually import a certificate to validate OCSP repsonses? Isn't everything that's required expected to be part of the OCSP response? I have tried and imported the cert from comment 37 into my cert database, and I still get the same failure.
Assignee | ||
Comment 40•16 years ago
|
||
(In reply to comment #38) > Kai, it would be very useful if the error code could differ in case for > intermediate CAs. Is this possible to implement within a useful time frame? You could file a separate enhancement request against NSS libraries. I can't say how likely this is to happen and when.
Assignee | ||
Comment 41•16 years ago
|
||
(In reply to comment #36) > the issuing CA was re-issued in order to support an issue re: cross > certification with a legacy root. Please ensure that you are testing with the > following intermediate certificate: I deleted the other intermediate, and imported your new intermediate from comment 36. No change, still fails.
Comment 42•16 years ago
|
||
Kai, Again thank you for your work on this, much appreciated. My appologies here. In reading the debug I see that NSS is indicating that the peer's (End Entity) certificate has been revoked, which it has, per my earlier comment regarding rebuilding the CA to support cross certification with a legacy root. The current certificate to test with would be the cert present on the server: https://nerys.wellsfargo.com/test.html which is given here: serial# 04 b6 Thursday, January 22, 2009 4:59:23 PM Saturday, January 22, 2011 4:59:23 PM CN = nerys.wellsfargo.com OU = PKI O = Wells Fargo and Company SERIALNUMBER = 02649647 STREET = 2600 S. Price L = Chandler S = AZ PostalCode = 85286 C = US 1.3.6.1.4.1.311.60.2.1.2 = California 1.3.6.1.4.1.311.60.2.1.3 = US -----BEGIN CERTIFICATE----- MIIFLTCCBBWgAwIBAgICBLYwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQAwgYwxCzAJBgNVBAYTAlVT MRQwEgYDVQQKEwtXZWxscyBGYXJnbzEsMCoGA1UECxMjV2VsbHMgRmFyZ28gQ2Vy dGlmaWNhdGUgQXV0aG9yaXRpZXMxOTA3BgNVBAMTMFdlbGxzIEZhcmdvIFB1Ymxp YyBQcmltYXJ5IENlcnRpZmljYXRlIEF1dGhvcml0eTAeFw0wOTAxMjIyMzU5MjNa Fw0xMTAxMjIyMzU5MjNaMIHpMRMwEQYLKwYBBAGCNzwCAQMTAlVTMRswGQYLKwYB BAGCNzwCAQIMCkNhbGlmb3JuaWExCzAJBgNVBAYTAlVTMQ4wDAYDVQQRDAU4NTI4 NjELMAkGA1UECAwCQVoxETAPBgNVBAcMCENoYW5kbGVyMRYwFAYDVQQJDA0yNjAw IFMuIFByaWNlMREwDwYDVQQFEwgwMjY0OTY0NzEgMB4GA1UECgwXV2VsbHMgRmFy Z28gYW5kIENvbXBhbnkxDDAKBgNVBAsMA1BLSTEdMBsGA1UEAwwUbmVyeXMud2Vs bHNmYXJnby5jb20wgZ8wDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQADgY0AMIGJAoGBALrcOSkhC6+2 TZTpm+IbeKL1plNOMgiF+1tQUzzIn3G2JKZXooPGxqzavI/UXFEt2lTR+cjnnla4 B3NNnBkDjDiz8KoC7EfTil1NiSmJhOQGrNeR56pJKfEUDLkG+X+Yaya7uwo6F4LK XIWhhHklQCbyCPvgDEq9K56GecXzFfe/AgMBAAGjggG8MIIBuDAMBgNVHRMBAf8E AjAAMB8GA1UdEQQYMBaCFG5lcnlzLndlbGxzZmFyZ28uY29tMHQGCCsGAQUFBwEB BGgwZjAsBggrBgEFBQcwAYYgaHR0cDovL3ZhbGlkYXRvci53ZWxsc2ZhcmdvLmNv bS8wNgYIKwYBBQUHMAKGKmh0dHA6Ly9jcmwucGtpLndlbGxzZmFyZ28uY29tL3dm X2V2XzAwLmNydDCBgAYDVR0gBHkwdzA6BgtghkgBhvt7g3QAADArMCkGCCsGAQUF BwIBFh1odHRwOi8vd3d3LndlbGxzZmFyZ28uY29tL2NwLzA5BgpghkgBhvt7g3QJ MCswKQYIKwYBBQUHAgEWHWh0dHA6Ly93d3cud2VsbHNmYXJnby5jb20vY3AvMA4G A1UdDwEB/wQEAwIFoDATBgNVHSUEDDAKBggrBgEFBQcDATATBgNVHSMEDDAKgAhE MbWJgctA2TA1BgNVHR8ELjAsMCqgKKAmhiRodHRwOi8vY3JsLnBraS53ZWxsc2Zh cmdvLmNvbS9ldi5jcmwwHQYDVR0OBBYEFP6QLgIIJzxZtuIZ87bRXkd4/LDzMA0G CSqGSIb3DQEBBQUAA4IBAQBF9ddG/3hspkvECE/iIF2R+XhuosVePGI1tXBfShyj dxO2Q/0LCDFVaC/Ukb8pA0p6YuTfTyy8Jn77/UlpBokadPDRSPsXed1iwSTk6LdJ /a6IJYC02Vm/Ocu0RV0Lg0dz6iU4Ll/2pajJghdh30DueP916uStQbmzuEcX4Pbv jdfQUf2ZhlJ/1UhPNbolt3IOo6QsBXUKxDPrRJLcYoHwXrMMAZCgGWZn6QCUAC0/ cCvxXIoCyZAQrD2Bp9HCYp5p8xiV9lgXfb/GMl10XD9SIuubeCtJ8IPEuWvZiITD XQKP7G4YQsyX4/WjaV+ywq5dyNeTdWYP5rKiwXYDxiru -----END CERTIFICATE-----
Assignee | ||
Comment 43•16 years ago
|
||
NSS might be buggy. The cert DB in my firefox profile had two intermediates and one responder from WellsFargo imports in its database. With that configuration, visiting your test site resulted in "EV failure". I deleted the 3 certs for testing and tried again. Now when I connect again to your test site (using experimental trunk), I get green EV.
Comment 44•16 years ago
|
||
While Kai is out, I have tried to reproduce his results. I am finding that the OCSP server rejects the OCSP request for the intermediate CA cert's status. The http response reads: HTTP/1.0 403 Forbidden.. Server: Tumbleweed Valicert VA 4.9.. Content-type: text/plain.. Content-length: 25.. Connection: Close.. .. Rejected :Error in format..
No longer depends on: 418644
Assignee | ||
Comment 45•16 years ago
|
||
WellsSecure: Maybe using the test build at https://build.mozilla.org/tryserver-builds/2009-03-11_10:52-kaie@kuix.de-kaie-evroots-0903/ can help you debug your OCSP environment? We need to see a successful test before we can enable your root.
Comment 46•15 years ago
|
||
We are uploading an OCSP signing cert for our intermediate CA Thursday night. We will then test it using the build Kai provided. This new build from Kai should help us greatly in verifying that the functionality is where we need it to be to enable the green bar. All of our previous testing was based on the fact that there is no error presented by Firefox 3 and we see the green bar when we view the test site with IE7. We will post our results here.
Comment 47•15 years ago
|
||
We have finished testing with the Shiretoko browser and are pleased to report that we have seen a green bar with this test build. Kai can you please verify this works and advise on how to proceed with the activation process.
Comment 48•15 years ago
|
||
Kai, Have you had a chance to verify our test results with the Shiretoko Browser? Please update this ticket with the current status. Thank you
Comment 49•15 years ago
|
||
Contains also Secom Trust from previous patch. Recent EV enablement patches will be combined into one patch - this is one is for my reference.
Updated•15 years ago
|
Attachment #378289 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Comment 50•15 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 378289 [details] [diff] [review] WellsSecure EV OID patch Obsoleted by attachment 378295 [details] [diff] [review]
Comment 51•15 years ago
|
||
Does this mean that our functionality has been verified and that we are being included?
Comment 52•15 years ago
|
||
I only created the patch for your EV OID upon request from Nelson and it appears to be working correctly. However final judgment should be only made after a current nightly or try-built was produced after applying the patch.
Comment 53•15 years ago
|
||
Thank you, Will the results be posted here?
Comment 54•15 years ago
|
||
Most likely you'll be invited to review and confirm the expected result by yourself.
Comment 55•15 years ago
|
||
I believe this bug was fixed by the checkin for Bug 493709 - Combined EV enablement so I am resolving this bug as fixed. Please reopen it if it is not fixed.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 15 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•