This PR is in response to issue #454. I tried repeating the reported problem by creating a certificate in which the extendedKeyUsage extension was present and only included the anyExtendedKeyUsage OID. In running the test, I discovered two problems.
First, when `determine_trust()` is calling `verify_retcode_helper()` to display the reason that path validation failed, it assumes that there are at least two certificate bundles provided. (I was running the test using just one certificate bundle, containing my local root.) So, I changed `determine_trust()` to use `${verify_retcode[1]}` rather than `${verify_retcode[2]}` in the case that all bundles failed (it seems that 2 vs. 1 was an arbitrary choice).
Once that was fixed, testssl.sh output "NOT ok (unknown, pls report) 26". So, the second thing this PR fixes is to output "NOT ok (unsupported certificate purpose)" if OpenSSL responds with an unsupported certificate purpose error.
In the check for old versions of OpenSSL, the results of the call to `ignore_no_or_lame()` are ignored, and so the program continues even if the user enters `no`.
This PR makes three changes to `determine_optimal_proto()`:
* It no longer tries an empty string for `$OPTIMAL_PROTO` twice.
* It does not include `-servername` for `-ssl2` or `-ssl3`, since some versions of OpenSSL that support SSLv2 will fail if `s_client` is provided both the `-ssl2` and `-servername` options.
* It displays a warning if `$OPTIMAL_PROTO` is `-ssl2`, since some tests in testssl.sh will not work correctly for SSLv2-only servers.
This PR changes test_just_one() to correctly handle SSLv2 ciphers.
As with PR #424, this PR addresses the problem in which servers that do not implement SSLv2, but that implement RC4-MD5, EXP-RC2-CBC-MD5, EXP-RC4-MD5, or NULL-MD5 are shown as implementing both the SSLv2 and SSLv3 versions of the ciphers, and that any SSLv2 ciphers that a server does implement are not shown as being implemented.
This PR changes run_rc4() to correctly handle SSLv2 ciphers.
It addresses the problem in which servers that do not implement SSLv2, but that implement SSLv3 ciphers that share an OpenSSL name with an SSLv2 cipher (RC4-MD5 and EXP-RC4-MD5), are not incorrectly shown as having implemented the SSLv2 cipher.
It also addresses the problem that if a server does implement SSLv2 with an RC4 SSLv2-cipher suite, then that cipher suite it not shown as being implemented.
`certificate_info()` does not correctly display the Issuer name for CAs that use domain component attributes.
There is a server on the NIST intra-net that I test against that has a certificate issued by a NIST CA, and the issuer name in the certificate is of the form: `/DC=net/DC=example/DC=internal/CN=CAname`
Since there is no organizational name, testssl.sh displays the name as:
```
Issuer "CAname" ("")
```
In this PR, if the Issuer name has 'DC=' attributes, but does not have an 'O=' attribute, the "DC=" attributes are combined into a DNS name that is used as if it were the organizational name:
```
Issuer "CAname" ("internal.example.net")
```
I should note, however, that I have not been able to find any other examples of TLS server certificates that have been issued by CAs that have domain components ("DC=") in their names. So, it may not be worthwhile to change the code to try to accommodate such CAs.
`certificate_info()` currently outputs `$issuer` to the JSON file, where is should be outputting `$issuer_CN` in order for the information in the JSON file to match the information that is displayed.
This PR also fixes the problem that if an Issuer name contains a domain component attribute (DC=) then it will be mistakenly treated as a country attribute (C=).
David Cooper
Dirk