You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Describe the bug
I believe the device to which the below report pertains does not support/offer TLS 1.3.
The text "certificate could not be validated" implies that there was a certificate, but it could not be validated for some reason (issue with the cert/issue with the cert chain/issue with Testrun itself/etc.), as opposed to the fact that TLS 1.3 is not supported and/or a certificate was not presented as a result.
Expected behavior
If a service doesn't support/offer TLS 1.3, this should be stated as such, to remove any ambiguity over whether a certificate was presented.
The details of the certificate failures can be found in the tls-result.json file generated by Testrun in the tls module folder of the report zip. There is currently an open ticket on how best to provide this information into the various module reports when this type of detail is generated. For the report you provided, the details generated indicate it was not signed as the failure:
"details": "TLS 1.2 not validated: Certificate has a valid time range\nRSA key length passed: 2048 >= 2048\nDevice certificate has not been signed",
In this particular case the concern was more that the DUT does not support TLS 1.3, but the text against the security.tls.v1_3_server test may lead you to interpret that a certificate was indeed presented, but it couldn't be validated for some reason (issue with the cert/issue with the cert chain/issue with Testrun itself/etc.).
I would be tempted to suggest that if a service doesn't support/offer TLS 1.3, this should be stated as such in the test description/result text, to remove any ambiguity over whether a certificate was presented or not. 👍
Describe the bug
I believe the device to which the below report pertains does not support/offer TLS 1.3.
The text "certificate could not be validated" implies that there was a certificate, but it could not be validated for some reason (issue with the cert/issue with the cert chain/issue with Testrun itself/etc.), as opposed to the fact that TLS 1.3 is not supported and/or a certificate was not presented as a result.
Expected behavior
If a service doesn't support/offer TLS 1.3, this should be stated as such, to remove any ambiguity over whether a certificate was presented.
Error logs
multitech.zip
Environment (please provide the following information about your setup):
Additional context
Only modifications from official 2.1 release are as below.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: