From patchwork Thu Mar 30 15:34:39 2023 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Siddharth X-Patchwork-Id: 21935 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7068AC6FD1D for ; Thu, 30 Mar 2023 15:34:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-pj1-f53.google.com (mail-pj1-f53.google.com [209.85.216.53]) by mx.groups.io with SMTP id smtpd.web11.28821.1680190488306024229 for ; Thu, 30 Mar 2023 08:34:48 -0700 Authentication-Results: mx.groups.io; dkim=pass header.i=@mvista.com header.s=google header.b=U/dENr0y; spf=pass (domain: mvista.com, ip: 209.85.216.53, mailfrom: sdoshi@mvista.com) Received: by mail-pj1-f53.google.com with SMTP id l7so17570232pjg.5 for ; Thu, 30 Mar 2023 08:34:48 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mvista.com; s=google; t=1680190487; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:subject:cc :to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=1gjwjjhjE6BbnbN8aKiAKOLczX5msvHfDPRuW3xxECI=; b=U/dENr0yzbxe0PjNIBkKhtkN+Lb1Y6BXsSdl18IuOw9htfRZnprnpS+Z/yg5aeU620 AtPjeAUNHvIZ0Cwy2NtucgexQ8lIDQVsNOfC4z4rytWTf0Vwnh73m21VQuCq8Rw01Mpy syZd/advE4gZJvM/dHNZVA6nPQJILEcKL3DzQ= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; t=1680190487; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:subject:cc :to:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=1gjwjjhjE6BbnbN8aKiAKOLczX5msvHfDPRuW3xxECI=; b=Qn0A6FJysHMGoJfNzeDEswLVGz342PqFavZ65YgdqcAyHS7C87WKjRERw7BEkDgoOW JWDYNUFTv5zd6BzkPkvFdb9PpEx3iYkqDnuEbziWbti/m6n0sq+nNj4MxlYwktGulUlk MowvcsMJt7iuMQqNhUKMN5L06940RZvn76zRNSi64vjGhnpoi63G+sNQoBhdMXVvtKax 2x9ry75zBDoP7xrISeBWBs1Wk8a3rFxqsuJumLl4rUByR1vtv3X93lM8AFRdQsx+yKGW kfPW7fbuv/4h+dkMmMotm39FP+sZ/xe+8NpxxkuaC4zTOQ2XGGmUjWxJJ7540y7WsBgQ KJLg== X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKXbFOMBl6vGBR9wY4Ne1dzVDqRxclrcmxK5kXEoG6lp4SZfa5LI u2tnxws8JsH5w54YdCJuySlRQBrmzo7CpT7lklM= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set8QZkxJLcXoSQFYzb/UFLBQPEW5oN6iPNyVXJVi0XglL2VoFJtX3UqtU8jRrhvQN7saFbLvng== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a20:6714:b0:da:897b:ae40 with SMTP id q20-20020a056a20671400b000da897bae40mr22039054pzh.37.1680190486914; Thu, 30 Mar 2023 08:34:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([49.34.187.146]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id n23-20020aa78a57000000b005809d382016sm25428pfa.74.2023.03.30.08.34.44 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 30 Mar 2023 08:34:46 -0700 (PDT) From: Siddharth To: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org Cc: Siddharth Doshi Subject: [OE-core][dunfell][PATCH] openssl: Security fix for CVE-2023-0464, CVE-2023-0465, CVE-2023-0466 Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2023 21:04:39 +0530 Message-Id: <20230330153439.111910-1-sdoshi@mvista.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.25.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 List-Id: X-Webhook-Received: from li982-79.members.linode.com [45.33.32.79] by aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org with HTTPS for ; Thu, 30 Mar 2023 15:34:52 -0000 X-Groupsio-URL: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/179335 From: Siddharth Doshi Upstream-Status: - CVE-2023-0464: Backport from [https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git;a=commitdiff;h=879f7080d7e141f415c79eaa3a8ac4a3dad0348b] - CVE-2023-0465: Backport from [https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git;a=commitdiff;h=b013765abfa80036dc779dd0e50602c57bb3bf95] - CVE-2023-0466: Backport from [https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git;a=commitdiff;h=0d16b7e99aafc0b4a6d729eec65a411a7e025f0a] Signed-off-by: Siddharth Doshi --- .../openssl/openssl/CVE-2023-0464.patch | 226 ++++++++++++++++++ .../openssl/openssl/CVE-2023-0465.patch | 58 +++++ .../openssl/openssl/CVE-2023-0466.patch | 50 ++++ .../openssl/openssl_1.1.1t.bb | 3 + 4 files changed, 337 insertions(+) create mode 100644 meta/recipes-connectivity/openssl/openssl/CVE-2023-0464.patch create mode 100644 meta/recipes-connectivity/openssl/openssl/CVE-2023-0465.patch create mode 100644 meta/recipes-connectivity/openssl/openssl/CVE-2023-0466.patch diff --git a/meta/recipes-connectivity/openssl/openssl/CVE-2023-0464.patch b/meta/recipes-connectivity/openssl/openssl/CVE-2023-0464.patch new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..04dbb40a39 --- /dev/null +++ b/meta/recipes-connectivity/openssl/openssl/CVE-2023-0464.patch @@ -0,0 +1,226 @@ +From 879f7080d7e141f415c79eaa3a8ac4a3dad0348b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 +From: Pauli +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 +Reviewed-by: Shane Lontis +(Merged from https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/20569) + +Upstream-Status: Backport from [https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git;a=commitdiff;h=879f7080d7e141f415c79eaa3a8ac4a3dad0348b] +CVE: CVE-2023-0464 +Signed-off-by: Siddharth Doshi +--- + crypto/x509v3/pcy_local.h | 8 +++++++- + crypto/x509v3/pcy_node.c | 12 +++++++++--- + crypto/x509v3/pcy_tree.c | 37 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------- + 3 files changed, 43 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) + +diff --git a/crypto/x509v3/pcy_local.h b/crypto/x509v3/pcy_local.h +index 5daf78d..344aa06 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 e2d7b15..d574fb9 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 6e8322c..6c7fd35 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) +-- +2.25.1 + diff --git a/meta/recipes-connectivity/openssl/openssl/CVE-2023-0465.patch b/meta/recipes-connectivity/openssl/openssl/CVE-2023-0465.patch new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..78b73a663d --- /dev/null +++ b/meta/recipes-connectivity/openssl/openssl/CVE-2023-0465.patch @@ -0,0 +1,58 @@ +From b013765abfa80036dc779dd0e50602c57bb3bf95 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 +From: Matt Caswell +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 +Reviewed-by: Tomas Mraz +(Merged from https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/20588) + +Upstream-Status: Backport from [https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git;a=commitdiff;h=b013765abfa80036dc779dd0e50602c57bb3bf95] +CVE: CVE-2023-0465 +Signed-off-by: Siddharth Doshi +--- + crypto/x509/x509_vfy.c | 11 +++++++++-- + 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) + +diff --git a/crypto/x509/x509_vfy.c b/crypto/x509/x509_vfy.c +index 925fbb5..1dfe4f9 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) { +-- +2.25.1 + diff --git a/meta/recipes-connectivity/openssl/openssl/CVE-2023-0466.patch b/meta/recipes-connectivity/openssl/openssl/CVE-2023-0466.patch new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..19ef9a6fd7 --- /dev/null +++ b/meta/recipes-connectivity/openssl/openssl/CVE-2023-0466.patch @@ -0,0 +1,50 @@ +From 0d16b7e99aafc0b4a6d729eec65a411a7e025f0a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 +From: Tomas Mraz +Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2023 16:15:47 +0100 +Subject: [PATCH] Fix documentation of X509_VERIFY_PARAM_add0_policy() + +The function was incorrectly documented as enabling policy checking. + +Fixes: CVE-2023-0466 + +Reviewed-by: Matt Caswell +Reviewed-by: Paul Dale +(Merged from https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/20564) + +Upstream-Status: Backport from [https://git.openssl.org/gitweb/?p=openssl.git;a=commitdiff;h=0d16b7e99aafc0b4a6d729eec65a411a7e025f0a] +CVE: CVE-2023-0466 +Signed-off-by: Siddharth Doshi +--- + doc/man3/X509_VERIFY_PARAM_set_flags.pod | 9 +++++++-- + 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) + +diff --git a/doc/man3/X509_VERIFY_PARAM_set_flags.pod b/doc/man3/X509_VERIFY_PARAM_set_flags.pod +index f6f304b..aa292f9 100644 +--- a/doc/man3/X509_VERIFY_PARAM_set_flags.pod ++++ b/doc/man3/X509_VERIFY_PARAM_set_flags.pod +@@ -92,8 +92,9 @@ 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 +@@ -377,6 +378,10 @@ and has no effect. + + The X509_VERIFY_PARAM_get_hostflags() function was added in OpenSSL 1.1.0i. + ++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 2009-2020 The OpenSSL Project Authors. All Rights Reserved. +-- +2.25.1 + diff --git a/meta/recipes-connectivity/openssl/openssl_1.1.1t.bb b/meta/recipes-connectivity/openssl/openssl_1.1.1t.bb index a1956ad8c2..46875b525c 100644 --- a/meta/recipes-connectivity/openssl/openssl_1.1.1t.bb +++ b/meta/recipes-connectivity/openssl/openssl_1.1.1t.bb @@ -18,6 +18,9 @@ SRC_URI = "http://www.openssl.org/source/openssl-${PV}.tar.gz \ file://afalg.patch \ file://reproducible.patch \ file://reproducibility.patch \ + file://CVE-2023-0464.patch \ + file://CVE-2023-0465.patch \ + file://CVE-2023-0466.patch \ " SRC_URI_append_class-nativesdk = " \