diff --git a/package/libs/openssl/Makefile b/package/libs/openssl/Makefile index 66ababab3c7..a34a7849733 100644 --- a/package/libs/openssl/Makefile +++ b/package/libs/openssl/Makefile @@ -8,8 +8,8 @@ include $(TOPDIR)/rules.mk PKG_NAME:=openssl -PKG_VERSION:=3.0.8 -PKG_RELEASE:=10 +PKG_VERSION:=3.0.9 +PKG_RELEASE:=1 PKG_BUILD_FLAGS:=no-mips16 gc-sections PKG_BUILD_PARALLEL:=1 @@ -24,7 +24,7 @@ PKG_SOURCE_URL:= \ ftp://ftp.pca.dfn.de/pub/tools/net/openssl/source/ \ ftp://ftp.pca.dfn.de/pub/tools/net/openssl/source/old/$(PKG_BASE)/ -PKG_HASH:=6c13d2bf38fdf31eac3ce2a347073673f5d63263398f1f69d0df4a41253e4b3e +PKG_HASH:=eb1ab04781474360f77c318ab89d8c5a03abc38e63d65a603cabbf1b00a1dc90 PKG_LICENSE:=Apache-2.0 PKG_LICENSE_FILES:=LICENSE diff --git a/package/libs/openssl/patches/120-strip-cflags-from-binary.patch b/package/libs/openssl/patches/120-strip-cflags-from-binary.patch index e9f4fc131aa..c4f2540395b 100644 --- a/package/libs/openssl/patches/120-strip-cflags-from-binary.patch +++ b/package/libs/openssl/patches/120-strip-cflags-from-binary.patch @@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ Signed-off-by: Eneas U de Queiroz --- a/crypto/build.info +++ b/crypto/build.info -@@ -113,7 +113,7 @@ DEFINE[../libcrypto]=$UPLINKDEF +@@ -111,7 +111,7 @@ DEFINE[../libcrypto]=$UPLINKDEF DEPEND[info.o]=buildinf.h DEPEND[cversion.o]=buildinf.h diff --git a/package/libs/openssl/patches/200-x509-excessive-resource-use-verifying-policy-constra.patch b/package/libs/openssl/patches/200-x509-excessive-resource-use-verifying-policy-constra.patch deleted file mode 100644 index 927634c0a74..00000000000 --- a/package/libs/openssl/patches/200-x509-excessive-resource-use-verifying-policy-constra.patch +++ /dev/null @@ -1,207 +0,0 @@ -From 959c59c7a0164117e7f8366466a32bb1f8d77ff1 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/20568) - ---- 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_ - 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); ---- a/crypto/x509/pcy_node.c -+++ b/crypto/x509/pcy_node.c -@@ -59,10 +59,15 @@ X509_POLICY_NODE *ossl_policy_level_find - 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->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_ - } - } - -- 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_ - } - } - -+ tree->node_count++; - if (parent) - parent->nchild++; - ---- 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 ** - 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 ** - 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 ** - * 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 - 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 - * 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_L - 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_POLIC - /* 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_LEV - /* 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_ - 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_TRE - - 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/package/libs/openssl/patches/210-Ensure-that-EXFLAG_INVALID_POLICY-is-checked-even-in.patch b/package/libs/openssl/patches/210-Ensure-that-EXFLAG_INVALID_POLICY-is-checked-even-in.patch deleted file mode 100644 index 01819c15a8b..00000000000 --- a/package/libs/openssl/patches/210-Ensure-that-EXFLAG_INVALID_POLICY-is-checked-even-in.patch +++ /dev/null @@ -1,44 +0,0 @@ -From 1dd43e0709fece299b15208f36cc7c76209ba0bb 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/20587) - ---- a/crypto/x509/x509_vfy.c -+++ b/crypto/x509/x509_vfy.c -@@ -1654,15 +1654,23 @@ static int check_policy(X509_STORE_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/package/libs/openssl/patches/220-aesv8-armx.pl-Avoid-buffer-overrread-in-AES-XTS-decr.patch b/package/libs/openssl/patches/220-aesv8-armx.pl-Avoid-buffer-overrread-in-AES-XTS-decr.patch deleted file mode 100644 index d6a45aec21e..00000000000 --- a/package/libs/openssl/patches/220-aesv8-armx.pl-Avoid-buffer-overrread-in-AES-XTS-decr.patch +++ /dev/null @@ -1,39 +0,0 @@ -From 02ac9c9420275868472f33b01def01218742b8bb Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 -From: Tomas Mraz -Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2023 16:51:20 +0200 -Subject: [PATCH] aesv8-armx.pl: Avoid buffer overrread in AES-XTS decryption - -Original author: Nevine Ebeid (Amazon) -Fixes: CVE-2023-1255 - -The buffer overread happens on decrypts of 4 mod 5 sizes. -Unless the memory just after the buffer is unmapped this is harmless. - -Reviewed-by: Paul Dale -Reviewed-by: Tom Cosgrove -(Merged from https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/20759) - -(cherry picked from commit 72dfe46550ee1f1bbfacd49f071419365bc23304) - -diff --git a/crypto/aes/asm/aesv8-armx.pl b/crypto/aes/asm/aesv8-armx.pl -index 6a7bf05d1b..bd583e2c89 100755 ---- a/crypto/aes/asm/aesv8-armx.pl -+++ b/crypto/aes/asm/aesv8-armx.pl -@@ -3353,7 +3353,7 @@ $code.=<<___ if ($flavour =~ /64/); - .align 4 - .Lxts_dec_tail4x: - add $inp,$inp,#16 -- vld1.32 {$dat0},[$inp],#16 -+ tst $tailcnt,#0xf - veor $tmp1,$dat1,$tmp0 - vst1.8 {$tmp1},[$out],#16 - veor $tmp2,$dat2,$tmp2 -@@ -3362,6 +3362,8 @@ $code.=<<___ if ($flavour =~ /64/); - veor $tmp4,$dat4,$tmp4 - vst1.8 {$tmp3-$tmp4},[$out],#32 - -+ b.eq .Lxts_dec_abort -+ vld1.32 {$dat0},[$inp],#16 - b .Lxts_done - .align 4 - .Lxts_outer_dec_tail: