From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (gate001.proxmox.com [IPv6:2a0f:8001:1:32::40]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 925D91FF0EA for ; Fri, 14 Aug 2026 16:32:47 +0200 (CEST) Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by gate001.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 44A8C226A9; Fri, 14 Aug 2026 16:32:47 +0200 (CEST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2026 16:32:43 +0200 Message-Id: Subject: Re: [PATCH proxmox-acme v4 3/3] fix #5978: pem parser: relax parsing of chain entries: From: "Elias Huhsovitz" To: "Thomas Ellmenreich" , X-Mailer: aerc 0.20.0 References: <20260805141114.190477-1-t.ellmenreich@proxmox.com> <20260805141114.190477-5-t.ellmenreich@proxmox.com> In-Reply-To: <20260805141114.190477-5-t.ellmenreich@proxmox.com> X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1786717944826 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.143 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment (newer systems) RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED -2.3 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, medium trust RDNS_NONE 1.274 Delivered to internal network by a host with no rDNS SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Message-ID-Hash: YWWMUJQDC7JSBKNDLDLHSGZ56XU2JIKF X-Message-ID-Hash: YWWMUJQDC7JSBKNDLDLHSGZ56XU2JIKF X-MailFrom: e.huhsovitz@proxmox.com X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; loop; banned-address; emergency; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.10 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Good standardization! Test methodology explained in review 1/3. Reviewed-by: Elias Huhsovitz Tested-by: Elias Huhsovitz On Wed Aug 5, 2026 at 4:11 PM CEST, Thomas Ellmenreich wrote: > Instead of using a custom regex to parse pem chains, now uses > the pve-common Certificate::check_pem function to do so. This > now allows for additional text and whitespace inbetween the > chain entries. > > Signed-off-by: Thomas Ellmenreich > --- > src/PVE/ACME.pm | 12 +++++++----- > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/src/PVE/ACME.pm b/src/PVE/ACME.pm > index e6fb9c2..665087b 100644 > --- a/src/PVE/ACME.pm > +++ b/src/PVE/ACME.pm > @@ -526,14 +526,16 @@ sub get_certificate { > } > } > } > - die "no matching alternate chain for '$root' returned by ser= ver\n" > + die "no matching alternate chain for '$root' provided by the= acme server\n" > if !defined($res); > } > =20 > - if ($res =3D~ /^(-----BEGIN CERTIFICATE-----)(.+)(-----END CERTI= FICATE-----)$/s) { # untaint > - return $1 . $2 . $3; > - } > - die "Server reply does not look like a PEM encoded certificate\n= "; > + my $parsed =3D eval { PVE::Certificate::check_pem($res, multiple= =3D> 1) }; > + chomp(my $error =3D $@); > + die > + "value returned by ACME certificate url does not look like a= PEM encoded certificate: " . $error . "\n" > + if $error; > + return $parsed; > }; > $self->fatal("POST of '$order->{certificate}' failed - $@", $r) if $= @; > return $return;