mirror
/
openwrt
mirror of https://git.openwrt.org/openwrt/openwrt.git
1
0
Fork 0
Code Releases Activity

openssl: bump to 1.1.1u 

Major changes between OpenSSL 1.1.1t and OpenSSL 1.1.1u [30 May 2023]

    o Mitigate for very slow `OBJ_obj2txt()` performance with gigantic
      OBJECT IDENTIFIER sub-identities.  (CVE-2023-2650)
    o Fixed documentation of X509_VERIFY_PARAM_add0_policy() (CVE-2023-0466)
    o Fixed handling of invalid certificate policies in leaf certificates
      (CVE-2023-0465)
    o Limited the number of nodes created in a policy tree ([CVE-2023-0464])

Signed-off-by: Hauke Mehrtens <hauke@hauke-m.de>
This commit is contained in:
Hauke Mehrtens 2023-06-07 22:37:47 +02:00
parent 171b515192
commit afb4422702
3 changed files with 3 additions and 265 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

6
package/libs/openssl/Makefile
View File

@ -9,9 +9,9 @@ include $(TOPDIR)/rules.mk
PKG_NAME:=openssl
PKG_BASE:=1.1.1
PKG_BUGFIX:=t
PKG_BUGFIX:=u
PKG_VERSION:=$(PKG_BASE)$(PKG_BUGFIX)
PKG_RELEASE:=3
PKG_RELEASE:=1
PKG_USE_MIPS16:=0
PKG_BUILD_PARALLEL:=1
@ -25,7 +25,7 @@ PKG_SOURCE_URL:= \
ftp://ftp.pca.dfn.de/pub/tools/net/openssl/source/ \
ftp://ftp.pca.dfn.de/pub/tools/net/openssl/source/old/$(PKG_BASE)/
PKG_HASH:=8dee9b24bdb1dcbf0c3d1e9b02fb8f6bf22165e807f45adeb7c9677536859d3b
PKG_HASH:=e2f8d84b523eecd06c7be7626830370300fbcc15386bf5142d72758f6963ebc6
PKG_LICENSE:=OpenSSL
PKG_LICENSE_FILES:=LICENSE

214
package/libs/openssl/patches/200-x509-excessive-resource-use-verifying-policy-constra.patch
View File

@ -1,214 +0,0 @@
From 879f7080d7e141f415c79eaa3a8ac4a3dad0348b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Pauli <pauli@openssl.org>
Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2023 15:28:20 +1100
Subject: [PATCH] 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 <tomas@openssl.org>
Reviewed-by: Shane Lontis <shane.lontis@oracle.com>
(Merged from https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/20569)
diff --git a/crypto/x509v3/pcy_local.h b/crypto/x509v3/pcy_local.h
index 5daf78de45..344aa06765 100644
--- a/crypto/x509v3/pcy_local.h
+++ b/crypto/x509v3/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;
@@ -159,7 +164,8 @@ X509_POLICY_NODE *tree_find_sk(STACK_OF(X509_POLICY_NODE) *sk,
X509_POLICY_NODE *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 policy_node_free(X509_POLICY_NODE *node);
int policy_node_match(const X509_POLICY_LEVEL *lvl,
const X509_POLICY_NODE *node, const ASN1_OBJECT *oid);
diff --git a/crypto/x509v3/pcy_node.c b/crypto/x509v3/pcy_node.c
index e2d7b15322..d574fb9d66 100644
--- a/crypto/x509v3/pcy_node.c
+++ b/crypto/x509v3/pcy_node.c
@@ -59,10 +59,15 @@ X509_POLICY_NODE *level_find_node(const X509_POLICY_LEVEL *level,
X509_POLICY_NODE *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) {
X509V3err(X509V3_F_LEVEL_ADD_NODE, ERR_R_MALLOC_FAILURE);
@@ -70,7 +75,7 @@ X509_POLICY_NODE *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 *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 *level_add_node(X509_POLICY_LEVEL *level,
}
}
+ tree->node_count++;
if (parent)
parent->nchild++;
diff --git a/crypto/x509v3/pcy_tree.c b/crypto/x509v3/pcy_tree.c
index 6e8322cbc5..6c7fd35405 100644
--- a/crypto/x509v3/pcy_tree.c
+++ b/crypto/x509v3/pcy_tree.c
@@ -13,6 +13,18 @@
#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
+
/*
* Enable this to print out the complete policy tree at various point during
* evaluation.
@@ -168,6 +180,9 @@ 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.
*
@@ -184,7 +199,7 @@ static int tree_init(X509_POLICY_TREE **ptree, STACK_OF(X509) *certs,
level = tree->levels;
if ((data = policy_data_new(NULL, OBJ_nid2obj(NID_any_policy), 0)) == NULL)
goto bad_tree;
- if (level_add_node(level, data, NULL, tree) == NULL) {
+ if (level_add_node(level, data, NULL, tree, 1) == NULL) {
policy_data_free(data);
goto bad_tree;
}
@@ -243,7 +258,8 @@ 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;
@@ -253,13 +269,13 @@ static int tree_link_matching_nodes(X509_POLICY_LEVEL *curr,
X509_POLICY_NODE *node = sk_X509_POLICY_NODE_value(last->nodes, i);
if (policy_node_match(last, node, data->valid_policy)) {
- if (level_add_node(curr, data, node, NULL) == NULL)
+ if (level_add_node(curr, data, node, tree, 0) == NULL)
return 0;
matched = 1;
}
}
if (!matched && last->anyPolicy) {
- if (level_add_node(curr, data, last->anyPolicy, NULL) == NULL)
+ if (level_add_node(curr, data, last->anyPolicy, tree, 0) == NULL)
return 0;
}
return 1;
@@ -272,7 +288,8 @@ 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;
@@ -280,7 +297,7 @@ 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;
@@ -311,7 +328,7 @@ 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 (level_add_node(curr, data, node, tree) == NULL) {
+ if (level_add_node(curr, data, node, tree, 1) == NULL) {
policy_data_free(data);
return 0;
}
@@ -373,7 +390,7 @@ static int tree_link_any(X509_POLICY_LEVEL *curr,
}
/* Finally add link to anyPolicy */
if (last->anyPolicy &&
- level_add_node(curr, cache->anyPolicy, last->anyPolicy, NULL) == NULL)
+ level_add_node(curr, cache->anyPolicy, last->anyPolicy, tree, 0) == NULL)
return 0;
return 1;
}
@@ -555,7 +572,7 @@ static int tree_calculate_user_set(X509_POLICY_TREE *tree,
extra->qualifier_set = anyPolicy->data->qualifier_set;
extra->flags = POLICY_DATA_FLAG_SHARED_QUALIFIERS
| POLICY_DATA_FLAG_EXTRA_NODE;
- node = level_add_node(NULL, extra, anyPolicy->parent, tree);
+ node = level_add_node(NULL, extra, anyPolicy->parent, tree, 1);
}
if (!tree->user_policies) {
tree->user_policies = sk_X509_POLICY_NODE_new_null();
@@ -582,7 +599,7 @@ static int tree_evaluate(X509_POLICY_TREE *tree)
for (i = 1; i < tree->nlevel; i++, curr++) {
cache = 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)

48
package/libs/openssl/patches/210-Ensure-that-EXFLAG_INVALID_POLICY-is-checked-even-in.patch
View File

@ -1,48 +0,0 @@
From b013765abfa80036dc779dd0e50602c57bb3bf95 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Matt Caswell <matt@openssl.org>
Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2023 16:52:55 +0000
Subject: [PATCH] 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 <hlandau@openssl.org>
Reviewed-by: Tomas Mraz <tomas@openssl.org>
(Merged from https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/20588)
diff --git a/crypto/x509/x509_vfy.c b/crypto/x509/x509_vfy.c
index 925fbb5412..1dfe4f9f31 100644
--- a/crypto/x509/x509_vfy.c
+++ b/crypto/x509/x509_vfy.c
@@ -1649,18 +1649,25 @@ static int check_policy(X509_STORE_CTX *ctx)
}
/* 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))
continue;
+ cbcalled = 1;
if (!verify_cb_cert(ctx, x, i,
X509_V_ERR_INVALID_POLICY_EXTENSION))
return 0;
}
+ if (!cbcalled) {
+ /* Should not be able to get here */
+ X509err(X509_F_CHECK_POLICY, ERR_R_INTERNAL_ERROR);
+ return 0;
+ }
+ /* The callback ignored the error so we return success */
return 1;
}
if (ret == X509_PCY_TREE_FAILURE) {