Re: [PATCH 2/2 v2] smime: tests of X.509 certificate validity are known-broken on GMime < 3.2.7

[David Bremner <david@tethera.net>]

Daniel Kahn Gillmor <dkg@fifthhorseman.net> writes:

> When checking cryptographic signatures, Notmuch relies on GMime to
> tell it whether the certificate that signs a message has a valid User
> ID or not.
>
> If the User ID is not valid, then notmuch does not report the signer's
> User ID to the user.  This means that the consumer of notmuch's
> cryptographic summary of a message (or of its protected headers) can
> be confident in relaying the reported identity to the user.
>
> However, some versions of GMime before 3.2.7 cannot report Certificate
> validity for X.509 certificates.  This is resolved upstream in GMime
> at https://github.com/jstedfast/gmime/pull/90.
>
> We adapt to this by marking tests of reported User IDs for
> S/MIME-signed messages as known-broken if GMime is older than 3.2.7
> and has not been patched.
>
> If GMime >= 3.2.7 and certificate validity still doesn't work for
> X.509 certs, then there has likely been a regression in GMime and we
> should fail early, during ./configure.
>
> To break out these specific User ID checks from other checks, i had to
> split some tests into two parts, and reuse $output across the two
> subtests.
>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Kahn Gillmor <dkg@fifthhorseman.net>
> ---
>  configure                      | 79 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  test/T355-smime.sh             | 17 +++++---
>  test/T356-protected-headers.sh | 13 +++++-
>  3 files changed, 100 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/configure b/configure
> index 0cfdaa6f..92e5bd1b 100755
> --- a/configure
> +++ b/configure
> @@ -536,6 +536,82 @@ EOF
>      if [ -n "$TEMP_GPG" -a -d "$TEMP_GPG" ]; then
>          rm -rf "$TEMP_GPG"
>      fi
> +
> +    # see https://github.com/jstedfast/gmime/pull/90
> +    # should be fixed in GMime in 3.2.7, but some distros might patch
> +    printf "Checking for GMime X.509 certificate validity... "
> +
> +    cat > _check_x509_validity.c <<EOF
> +#include <stdio.h>
> +#include <gmime/gmime.h>
> +
> +int main () {
> +    GError *error = NULL;
> +    GMimeParser *parser = NULL;
> +    GMimeApplicationPkcs7Mime *body = NULL;
> +    GMimeSignatureList *sig_list = NULL;
> +    GMimeSignature *sig = NULL;
> +    GMimeCertificate *cert = NULL;
> +    GMimeObject *output = NULL;
> +    GMimeValidity validity = GMIME_VALIDITY_UNKNOWN;
> +    int len;
> +
> +    g_mime_init ();
> +    parser = g_mime_parser_new ();
> +    g_mime_parser_init_with_stream (parser, g_mime_stream_file_open("test/corpora/pkcs7/smime-onepart-signed.eml", "r", &error));
> +    if (error) return !! fprintf (stderr, "failed to instantiate parser with test/corpora/pkcs7/smime-onepart-signed.eml\n");
> +
> +    body = GMIME_APPLICATION_PKCS7_MIME(g_mime_message_get_mime_part (g_mime_parser_construct_message (parser, NULL)));
> +    if (body == NULL) return !!	fprintf (stderr, "did not find a application/pkcs7 message\n");

I find these long lines with !! in the middle pretty surprising. Is
there some reason for this style? It doesn't seem to fit with the usual
conventions.

This line in particular has a tab in the middle.


> +    elif ${CC} ${CFLAGS} ${gmime_cflags} _check_x509_validity.c ${gmime_ldflags} -o _check_x509_validity \

The other test files are cleaned up in configure (source and binary)
once we are done with them.

As far as I could follow, the changes to the tests themselves look
reasonable.