From 8a7af49579922ef57c348f331581d5d565598c7c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: "Alex Xu (Hello71)" Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2023 21:03:36 -0400 Subject: dev-liba/openssl: sync --- dev-libs/openssl/files/gentoo.config-1.0.4 | 6 +- .../openssl/files/openssl-3.0.8-mips-cflags.patch | 30 +++ .../files/openssl-3.1.0-CVE-2023-0464.patch | 214 +++++++++++++++++++++ .../files/openssl-3.1.0-CVE-2023-0465.patch | 46 +++++ .../files/openssl-3.1.0-CVE-2023-0466.patch | 41 ++++ 5 files changed, 335 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) create mode 100644 dev-libs/openssl/files/openssl-3.0.8-mips-cflags.patch create mode 100644 dev-libs/openssl/files/openssl-3.1.0-CVE-2023-0464.patch create mode 100644 dev-libs/openssl/files/openssl-3.1.0-CVE-2023-0465.patch create mode 100644 dev-libs/openssl/files/openssl-3.1.0-CVE-2023-0466.patch (limited to 'dev-libs/openssl/files') diff --git a/dev-libs/openssl/files/gentoo.config-1.0.4 b/dev-libs/openssl/files/gentoo.config-1.0.4 index 573a97d..79f6331 100644 --- a/dev-libs/openssl/files/gentoo.config-1.0.4 +++ b/dev-libs/openssl/files/gentoo.config-1.0.4 @@ -77,7 +77,9 @@ fi # Detect target arch machine="" +submachine="" chost_machine=${CHOST%%-*} +[[ ${CC} == *clang* ]] && submachine="-clang" case ${system} in linux) case ${chost_machine}:${ABI} in @@ -95,7 +97,7 @@ linux) # hppa64*) machine=parisc64;; hppa*) machine="generic32 -DB_ENDIAN";; i[0-9]86*|\ - x86_64*:x86) machine=x86;; + x86_64*:x86) machine=x86${submachine};; ia64*) machine=ia64;; loongarch64*) machine="loongarch64 -DL_ENDIAN" system=linux64;; m68*) machine="latomic -DB_ENDIAN";; @@ -125,7 +127,7 @@ linux) s390x*) machine=s390x system=linux64;; s390*) machine="generic32 -DB_ENDIAN";; x86_64*:x32) machine=x32;; - x86_64*) machine=x86_64;; + x86_64*) machine=x86_64${submachine};; esac ;; BSD) diff --git a/dev-libs/openssl/files/openssl-3.0.8-mips-cflags.patch b/dev-libs/openssl/files/openssl-3.0.8-mips-cflags.patch new file mode 100644 index 0000000..111681f --- /dev/null +++ b/dev-libs/openssl/files/openssl-3.0.8-mips-cflags.patch @@ -0,0 +1,30 @@ +https://bugs.gentoo.org/894140 +https://github.com/openssl/openssl/issues/20214 + +From d500b51791cd56e73065e3a7f4487fc33f31c91c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 +From: Mike Gilbert +Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2023 17:56:58 -0500 +Subject: [PATCH] Fix Configure test for -mips in CFLAGS + +We want to add -mips2 or -mips3 only if the user hasn't already +specified a mips version in CFLAGS. The existing test was a +double-negative. + +Fixes: https://github.com/openssl/openssl/issues/20214 +--- + Configure | 2 +- + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) + +diff --git a/Configure b/Configure +index b6bbec0a85c4..ec48614d6b99 100755 +--- a/Configure ++++ b/Configure +@@ -1475,7 +1475,7 @@ if ($target =~ /^mingw/ && `$config{CC} --target-help 2>&1` =~ m/-mno-cygwin/m) + } + + if ($target =~ /linux.*-mips/ && !$disabled{asm} +- && !grep { $_ !~ /-m(ips|arch=)/ } (@{$config{CFLAGS}})) { ++ && !grep { $_ =~ /-m(ips|arch=)/ } (@{$config{CFLAGS}})) { + # minimally required architecture flags for assembly modules + my $value; + $value = '-mips2' if ($target =~ /mips32/); diff --git a/dev-libs/openssl/files/openssl-3.1.0-CVE-2023-0464.patch b/dev-libs/openssl/files/openssl-3.1.0-CVE-2023-0464.patch new file mode 100644 index 0000000..dfe83e5 --- /dev/null +++ b/dev-libs/openssl/files/openssl-3.1.0-CVE-2023-0464.patch @@ -0,0 +1,214 @@ +commit 2017771e2db3e2b96f89bbe8766c3209f6a99545 +Author: Pauli +Date: Wed Mar 8 15:28:20 2023 +1100 + + x509: excessive resource use verifying policy constraints + + A security vulnerability has been identified in all supported versions + of OpenSSL related to the verification of X.509 certificate chains + that include policy constraints. Attackers may be able to exploit this + vulnerability by creating a malicious certificate chain that triggers + exponential use of computational resources, leading to a denial-of-service + (DoS) attack on affected systems. + + Fixes CVE-2023-0464 + + Reviewed-by: Tomas Mraz + Reviewed-by: Shane Lontis + (Merged from https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/20570) + +diff --git a/crypto/x509/pcy_local.h b/crypto/x509/pcy_local.h +index 18b53cc09e..cba107ca03 100644 +--- a/crypto/x509/pcy_local.h ++++ b/crypto/x509/pcy_local.h +@@ -111,6 +111,11 @@ struct X509_POLICY_LEVEL_st { + }; + + struct X509_POLICY_TREE_st { ++ /* The number of nodes in the tree */ ++ size_t node_count; ++ /* The maximum number of nodes in the tree */ ++ size_t node_maximum; ++ + /* This is the tree 'level' data */ + X509_POLICY_LEVEL *levels; + int nlevel; +@@ -157,7 +162,8 @@ X509_POLICY_NODE *ossl_policy_tree_find_sk(STACK_OF(X509_POLICY_NODE) *sk, + X509_POLICY_NODE *ossl_policy_level_add_node(X509_POLICY_LEVEL *level, + X509_POLICY_DATA *data, + X509_POLICY_NODE *parent, +- X509_POLICY_TREE *tree); ++ X509_POLICY_TREE *tree, ++ int extra_data); + void ossl_policy_node_free(X509_POLICY_NODE *node); + int ossl_policy_node_match(const X509_POLICY_LEVEL *lvl, + const X509_POLICY_NODE *node, const ASN1_OBJECT *oid); +diff --git a/crypto/x509/pcy_node.c b/crypto/x509/pcy_node.c +index 9d9a7ea179..450f95a655 100644 +--- a/crypto/x509/pcy_node.c ++++ b/crypto/x509/pcy_node.c +@@ -59,10 +59,15 @@ X509_POLICY_NODE *ossl_policy_level_find_node(const X509_POLICY_LEVEL *level, + X509_POLICY_NODE *ossl_policy_level_add_node(X509_POLICY_LEVEL *level, + X509_POLICY_DATA *data, + X509_POLICY_NODE *parent, +- X509_POLICY_TREE *tree) ++ X509_POLICY_TREE *tree, ++ int extra_data) + { + X509_POLICY_NODE *node; + ++ /* Verify that the tree isn't too large. This mitigates CVE-2023-0464 */ ++ if (tree->node_maximum > 0 && tree->node_count >= tree->node_maximum) ++ return NULL; ++ + node = OPENSSL_zalloc(sizeof(*node)); + if (node == NULL) { + ERR_raise(ERR_LIB_X509V3, ERR_R_MALLOC_FAILURE); +@@ -70,7 +75,7 @@ X509_POLICY_NODE *ossl_policy_level_add_node(X509_POLICY_LEVEL *level, + } + node->data = data; + node->parent = parent; +- if (level) { ++ if (level != NULL) { + if (OBJ_obj2nid(data->valid_policy) == NID_any_policy) { + if (level->anyPolicy) + goto node_error; +@@ -90,7 +95,7 @@ X509_POLICY_NODE *ossl_policy_level_add_node(X509_POLICY_LEVEL *level, + } + } + +- if (tree) { ++ if (extra_data) { + if (tree->extra_data == NULL) + tree->extra_data = sk_X509_POLICY_DATA_new_null(); + if (tree->extra_data == NULL){ +@@ -103,6 +108,7 @@ X509_POLICY_NODE *ossl_policy_level_add_node(X509_POLICY_LEVEL *level, + } + } + ++ tree->node_count++; + if (parent) + parent->nchild++; + +diff --git a/crypto/x509/pcy_tree.c b/crypto/x509/pcy_tree.c +index fa45da5117..f953a05a41 100644 +--- a/crypto/x509/pcy_tree.c ++++ b/crypto/x509/pcy_tree.c +@@ -14,6 +14,17 @@ + + #include "pcy_local.h" + ++/* ++ * If the maximum number of nodes in the policy tree isn't defined, set it to ++ * a generous default of 1000 nodes. ++ * ++ * Defining this to be zero means unlimited policy tree growth which opens the ++ * door on CVE-2023-0464. ++ */ ++#ifndef OPENSSL_POLICY_TREE_NODES_MAX ++# define OPENSSL_POLICY_TREE_NODES_MAX 1000 ++#endif ++ + static void expected_print(BIO *channel, + X509_POLICY_LEVEL *lev, X509_POLICY_NODE *node, + int indent) +@@ -163,6 +174,9 @@ static int tree_init(X509_POLICY_TREE **ptree, STACK_OF(X509) *certs, + return X509_PCY_TREE_INTERNAL; + } + ++ /* Limit the growth of the tree to mitigate CVE-2023-0464 */ ++ tree->node_maximum = OPENSSL_POLICY_TREE_NODES_MAX; ++ + /* + * http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5280#section-6.1.2, figure 3. + * +@@ -180,7 +194,7 @@ static int tree_init(X509_POLICY_TREE **ptree, STACK_OF(X509) *certs, + if ((data = ossl_policy_data_new(NULL, + OBJ_nid2obj(NID_any_policy), 0)) == NULL) + goto bad_tree; +- if (ossl_policy_level_add_node(level, data, NULL, tree) == NULL) { ++ if (ossl_policy_level_add_node(level, data, NULL, tree, 1) == NULL) { + ossl_policy_data_free(data); + goto bad_tree; + } +@@ -239,7 +253,8 @@ static int tree_init(X509_POLICY_TREE **ptree, STACK_OF(X509) *certs, + * Return value: 1 on success, 0 otherwise + */ + static int tree_link_matching_nodes(X509_POLICY_LEVEL *curr, +- X509_POLICY_DATA *data) ++ X509_POLICY_DATA *data, ++ X509_POLICY_TREE *tree) + { + X509_POLICY_LEVEL *last = curr - 1; + int i, matched = 0; +@@ -249,13 +264,13 @@ static int tree_link_matching_nodes(X509_POLICY_LEVEL *curr, + X509_POLICY_NODE *node = sk_X509_POLICY_NODE_value(last->nodes, i); + + if (ossl_policy_node_match(last, node, data->valid_policy)) { +- if (ossl_policy_level_add_node(curr, data, node, NULL) == NULL) ++ if (ossl_policy_level_add_node(curr, data, node, tree, 0) == NULL) + return 0; + matched = 1; + } + } + if (!matched && last->anyPolicy) { +- if (ossl_policy_level_add_node(curr, data, last->anyPolicy, NULL) == NULL) ++ if (ossl_policy_level_add_node(curr, data, last->anyPolicy, tree, 0) == NULL) + return 0; + } + return 1; +@@ -268,7 +283,8 @@ static int tree_link_matching_nodes(X509_POLICY_LEVEL *curr, + * Return value: 1 on success, 0 otherwise. + */ + static int tree_link_nodes(X509_POLICY_LEVEL *curr, +- const X509_POLICY_CACHE *cache) ++ const X509_POLICY_CACHE *cache, ++ X509_POLICY_TREE *tree) + { + int i; + +@@ -276,7 +292,7 @@ static int tree_link_nodes(X509_POLICY_LEVEL *curr, + X509_POLICY_DATA *data = sk_X509_POLICY_DATA_value(cache->data, i); + + /* Look for matching nodes in previous level */ +- if (!tree_link_matching_nodes(curr, data)) ++ if (!tree_link_matching_nodes(curr, data, tree)) + return 0; + } + return 1; +@@ -307,7 +323,7 @@ static int tree_add_unmatched(X509_POLICY_LEVEL *curr, + /* Curr may not have anyPolicy */ + data->qualifier_set = cache->anyPolicy->qualifier_set; + data->flags |= POLICY_DATA_FLAG_SHARED_QUALIFIERS; +- if (ossl_policy_level_add_node(curr, data, node, tree) == NULL) { ++ if (ossl_policy_level_add_node(curr, data, node, tree, 1) == NULL) { + ossl_policy_data_free(data); + return 0; + } +@@ -370,7 +386,7 @@ static int tree_link_any(X509_POLICY_LEVEL *curr, + /* Finally add link to anyPolicy */ + if (last->anyPolicy && + ossl_policy_level_add_node(curr, cache->anyPolicy, +- last->anyPolicy, NULL) == NULL) ++ last->anyPolicy, tree, 0) == NULL) + return 0; + return 1; + } +@@ -553,7 +569,7 @@ static int tree_calculate_user_set(X509_POLICY_TREE *tree, + extra->flags = POLICY_DATA_FLAG_SHARED_QUALIFIERS + | POLICY_DATA_FLAG_EXTRA_NODE; + node = ossl_policy_level_add_node(NULL, extra, anyPolicy->parent, +- tree); ++ tree, 1); + } + if (!tree->user_policies) { + tree->user_policies = sk_X509_POLICY_NODE_new_null(); +@@ -580,7 +596,7 @@ static int tree_evaluate(X509_POLICY_TREE *tree) + + for (i = 1; i < tree->nlevel; i++, curr++) { + cache = ossl_policy_cache_set(curr->cert); +- if (!tree_link_nodes(curr, cache)) ++ if (!tree_link_nodes(curr, cache, tree)) + return X509_PCY_TREE_INTERNAL; + + if (!(curr->flags & X509_V_FLAG_INHIBIT_ANY) diff --git a/dev-libs/openssl/files/openssl-3.1.0-CVE-2023-0465.patch b/dev-libs/openssl/files/openssl-3.1.0-CVE-2023-0465.patch new file mode 100644 index 0000000..a98f7cb --- /dev/null +++ b/dev-libs/openssl/files/openssl-3.1.0-CVE-2023-0465.patch @@ -0,0 +1,46 @@ +commit facfb1ab745646e97a1920977ae4a9965ea61d5c +Author: Matt Caswell +Date: Tue Mar 7 16:52:55 2023 +0000 + + Ensure that EXFLAG_INVALID_POLICY is checked even in leaf certs + + Even though we check the leaf cert to confirm it is valid, we + later ignored the invalid flag and did not notice that the leaf + cert was bad. + + Fixes: CVE-2023-0465 + + Reviewed-by: Hugo Landau + Reviewed-by: Tomas Mraz + (Merged from https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/20586) + +diff --git a/crypto/x509/x509_vfy.c b/crypto/x509/x509_vfy.c +index 9384f1da9b..a0282c3ef1 100644 +--- a/crypto/x509/x509_vfy.c ++++ b/crypto/x509/x509_vfy.c +@@ -1654,15 +1654,23 @@ static int check_policy(X509_STORE_CTX *ctx) + goto memerr; + /* Invalid or inconsistent extensions */ + if (ret == X509_PCY_TREE_INVALID) { +- int i; ++ int i, cbcalled = 0; + + /* Locate certificates with bad extensions and notify callback. */ +- for (i = 1; i < sk_X509_num(ctx->chain); i++) { ++ for (i = 0; i < sk_X509_num(ctx->chain); i++) { + X509 *x = sk_X509_value(ctx->chain, i); + ++ if ((x->ex_flags & EXFLAG_INVALID_POLICY) != 0) ++ cbcalled = 1; + CB_FAIL_IF((x->ex_flags & EXFLAG_INVALID_POLICY) != 0, + ctx, x, i, X509_V_ERR_INVALID_POLICY_EXTENSION); + } ++ if (!cbcalled) { ++ /* Should not be able to get here */ ++ ERR_raise(ERR_LIB_X509, ERR_R_INTERNAL_ERROR); ++ return 0; ++ } ++ /* The callback ignored the error so we return success */ + return 1; + } + if (ret == X509_PCY_TREE_FAILURE) { diff --git a/dev-libs/openssl/files/openssl-3.1.0-CVE-2023-0466.patch b/dev-libs/openssl/files/openssl-3.1.0-CVE-2023-0466.patch new file mode 100644 index 0000000..9a315f4 --- /dev/null +++ b/dev-libs/openssl/files/openssl-3.1.0-CVE-2023-0466.patch @@ -0,0 +1,41 @@ +commit fc814a30fc4f0bc54fcea7d9a7462f5457aab061 +Author: Tomas Mraz +Date: Tue Mar 21 16:15:47 2023 +0100 + + Fix documentation of X509_VERIFY_PARAM_add0_policy() + + The function was incorrectly documented as enabling policy checking. + + Fixes: CVE-2023-0466 + + Reviewed-by: Paul Dale + Reviewed-by: Matt Caswell + (Merged from https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/20562) + +diff --git a/doc/man3/X509_VERIFY_PARAM_set_flags.pod b/doc/man3/X509_VERIFY_PARAM_set_flags.pod +index 20aea99b5b..fcbbfc4c30 100644 +--- a/doc/man3/X509_VERIFY_PARAM_set_flags.pod ++++ b/doc/man3/X509_VERIFY_PARAM_set_flags.pod +@@ -98,8 +98,9 @@ B. + X509_VERIFY_PARAM_set_time() sets the verification time in B to + B. Normally the current time is used. + +-X509_VERIFY_PARAM_add0_policy() enables policy checking (it is disabled +-by default) and adds B to the acceptable policy set. ++X509_VERIFY_PARAM_add0_policy() adds B to the acceptable policy set. ++Contrary to preexisting documentation of this function it does not enable ++policy checking. + + X509_VERIFY_PARAM_set1_policies() enables policy checking (it is disabled + by default) and sets the acceptable policy set to B. Any existing +@@ -400,6 +401,10 @@ The X509_VERIFY_PARAM_get_hostflags() function was added in OpenSSL 1.1.0i. + The X509_VERIFY_PARAM_get0_host(), X509_VERIFY_PARAM_get0_email(), + and X509_VERIFY_PARAM_get1_ip_asc() functions were added in OpenSSL 3.0. + ++The function X509_VERIFY_PARAM_add0_policy() was historically documented as ++enabling policy checking however the implementation has never done this. ++The documentation was changed to align with the implementation. ++ + =head1 COPYRIGHT + + Copyright 2009-2023 The OpenSSL Project Authors. All Rights Reserved. -- cgit v1.2.3-70-g09d2