Two convergence bugs surfaced by the security review:
- Role guard (finding B): processOffer accepted an offer even when we are the
KEM initiator for the peer, and processAnswer accepted an answer when we are
the responder. The KEM is unidirectional (initiator offers, responder
answers), so a role-violating message is anomalous — a desync, a duplicate,
or an injected/spoofed data-path packet. Processing it derived and committed
a fresh PSK, overwriting a live one and silently dropping any in-flight
exchange (whose retry loop then exited without raising a failure or
re-bootstrapping). Reject offers when we are the initiator and answers when
we are not; this drops only anomalous traffic and leaves the normal flow
untouched.
- Re-bootstrap on signal re-negotiation (finding A): SignalOffer was idempotent
in stateAwaitingRekey too, replaying the frozen bootstrap offer. After the
responder restarted and lost its state it derived a different PSK from fresh
material, which our awaitingRekey side then rejected — a permanent desync with
no recovery (in strict mode the peer stays blocked). Make the idempotency
apply only while a bootstrap is still in flight (awaitingAnswer); once a PSK
is derived, a fresh signal offer starts a new exchange so both sides converge.
The controller-double-offer case the idempotency guarded is already covered by
ShouldSendBootstrapOffer. Reusing the cached offer also reused the same
ephemeral keys across exchanges, reducing forward secrecy.
Both paths have a failing-without-the-fix regression test.
598d12eb68