This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora 23 development cycle.
Changing version to '23'.

(As we did not run this process for some time, it could affect also pre-Fedora 23 development
cycle bugs. We are very sorry. It will help us with cleanup during Fedora 23 End Of Life. Thank you.)

More information and reason for this action is here:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping/Fedora23

I found the following code:

#if GNUTLS_VERSION_NUMBER < 0x020c00
»···gnutls_transport_set_lowat(gnutls_channel->session, 0);

»···gnutls_priority_set_direct(gnutls_channel->session,
»···»···»···»···»···»···"NORMAL:%COMPAT", NULL);
#else
»···gnutls_priority_set_direct(gnutls_channel->session,
»···»···"NORMAL:-VERS-TLS-ALL:+VERS-TLS1.0:+VERS-SSL3.0:%COMPAT", NULL);
#endif

So how should that look like instead?

Cheers,

Pavel

(In reply to Pavel Šimerda (pavlix) from comment #2)
> I found the following code:
> 
> #if GNUTLS_VERSION_NUMBER < 0x020c00
> »···gnutls_transport_set_lowat(gnutls_channel->session, 0);
> 
> »···gnutls_priority_set_direct(gnutls_channel->session,
> »···»···»···»···»···»···"NORMAL:%COMPAT", NULL);
> #else
> »···gnutls_priority_set_direct(gnutls_channel->session,
> »···»···"NORMAL:-VERS-TLS-ALL:+VERS-TLS1.0:+VERS-SSL3.0:%COMPAT", NULL);
> #endif
> So how should that look like instead?

I'd replace the gnutls_priority_set_direct() with gnutls_set_default_priority() in both cases.

I'd also send that patch upstream as the code seems to deliberately disable TLS 1.1 and TLS 1.2 which is quite suspicious. For special scenarios which seem to be handled by the last string, upstream may want to make the priority string configurable for the user to tune.

Created attachment 1189656 [details]
patch: use system-wide crypto policies

I created an experimental patch for rawhide based on the above suggestions and submitted a patched build for rawhide. Please test the package and comment.

(In reply to Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos from comment #3)
> I'd also send that patch upstream as the code seems to deliberately disable
> TLS 1.1 and TLS 1.2 which is quite suspicious. For special scenarios which
> seem to be handled by the last string, upstream may want to make the
> priority string configurable for the user to tune.

Hi Nikos,

could you please check my changes and contact upstream? I don't think I understand the issue enough to present the arguments properly.

Cheers,

Pavel

Your changes look fine. For upstream I have no contact with them. I think if you direct them to this discussion it would be fine.

This message is a reminder that Fedora 23 is nearing its end of life.
Approximately 4 (four) weeks from now Fedora will stop maintaining
and issuing updates for Fedora 23. It is Fedora's policy to close all
bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained. At that time
this bug will be closed as EOL if it remains open with a Fedora  'version'
of '23'.

Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you
plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version' 
to a later Fedora version.

Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that we were not 
able to fix it before Fedora 23 is end of life. If you would still like 
to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it against a later version 
of Fedora, you are encouraged  change the 'version' to a later Fedora 
version prior this bug is closed as described in the policy above.

Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's 
lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events. Often a 
more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes 
bugs or makes them obsolete.

This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora 26 development cycle.
Changing version to '26'.

This message is a reminder that Fedora 26 is nearing its end of life.
Approximately 4 (four) weeks from now Fedora will stop maintaining
and issuing updates for Fedora 26. It is Fedora's policy to close all
bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained. At that time
this bug will be closed as EOL if it remains open with a Fedora  'version'
of '26'.

Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you
plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version'
to a later Fedora version.

Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that we were not
able to fix it before Fedora 26 is end of life. If you would still like
to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it against a later version
of Fedora, you are encouraged  change the 'version' to a later Fedora
version prior this bug is closed as described in the policy above.

Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's
lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events. Often a
more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes
bugs or makes them obsolete.

Fedora 26 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2018-05-29. Fedora 26
is no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any
further security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug.

If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of
Fedora please feel free to reopen this bug against that version. If you
are unable to reopen this bug, please file a new report against the
current release. If you experience problems, please add a comment to this
bug.

Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed.