I'm intentionally verbose in the hopes that someone has a second look at
it, it's important to get right.
On Sun, Feb 04, 2018 at 09:00:51AM +, Maya Rashish wrote:
> Fix OpenSSL 1.1.0 build
> OpenSSL 1.1.0 makes xkusage and ex_flags opaque.
> Use X509_check_ca rather than a custom and nearly identical implementation.
> This is available since OpenSSL 0.9.8 (even in RHEL5).
> This is also done because we cannot implement it identically under
> OpenSSL 1.1.0 due to missing getters.
> Test EXFLAG_XKUSAGE rather than zero xkusage test no usage to avoid openssl
> 1.1.0 getter returning a different code on this case.
> Use getter for xkusage in the non-zero test case.
> Provide fallback definitions for getters.
>
> PR pkg/52298, PR pkg/52648
>
> @@ -55,25 +55,12 @@ __RCSID("$NetBSD: pkcs7.c,v 1.2 2017/04/
> #define NS_ANY_CA(NS_SSL_CA|NS_SMIME_CA|NS_OBJSIGN_CA)
> #endif
>
> -static const unsigned int pkg_key_usage = XKU_CODE_SIGN | XKU_SMIME;
> +#if !defined(OPENSSL_VERSION_NUMBER) || (OPENSSL_VERSION_NUMBER <
> 0x1010L)
> +#define X509_get_extended_key_usage(x) x->ex_xkusage
> +#define X509_get_extension_flags(x) x->ex_flags
> +#endif
>
> -static int
> -check_ca(X509 *cert)
> -{
> - if ((cert->ex_flags & EXFLAG_KUSAGE) != 0 &&
> - (cert->ex_kusage & KU_KEY_CERT_SIGN) != KU_KEY_CERT_SIGN)
> - return 0;
> - if ((cert->ex_flags & EXFLAG_BCONS) != 0)
> - return (cert->ex_flags & EXFLAG_CA) == EXFLAG_CA;
> - if ((cert->ex_flags & (EXFLAG_V1|EXFLAG_SS)) == (EXFLAG_V1|EXFLAG_SS))
> - return 1;
> - if ((cert->ex_flags & EXFLAG_KUSAGE) != 0)
> - return 1;
> - if ((cert->ex_flags & EXFLAG_NSCERT) != 0 &&
> - (cert->ex_nscert & NS_ANY_CA) != 0)
> - return 1;
> - return 0;
> -}
> +static const unsigned int pkg_key_usage = XKU_CODE_SIGN | XKU_SMIME;
>
> static STACK_OF(X509) *
> file_to_certs(const char *file)
> @@ -180,18 +167,18 @@ easy_pkcs7_verify(const char *content, s
> /* Compute ex_xkusage */
> X509_check_purpose(sk_X509_value(signers, i), -1, -1);
>
> - if (check_ca(sk_X509_value(signers, i))) {
> + if (X509_check_ca(sk_X509_value(signers, i))) {
> warnx("CA keys are not valid for signatures");
> goto cleanup;
> }
> if (is_pkg) {
> - if (sk_X509_value(signers, i)->ex_xkusage !=
> pkg_key_usage) {
> + if (X509_get_extended_key_usage(sk_X509_value(signers,
> i)) != pkg_key_usage) {
> warnx("Certificate must have CODE SIGNING "
> "and EMAIL PROTECTION property");
> goto cleanup;
> }
> } else {
> - if (sk_X509_value(signers, i)->ex_xkusage != 0) {
> + if (X509_get_extension_flags(sk_X509_value(signers, i))
> & EXFLAG_XKUSAGE) {
> warnx("Certificate must not have any property");
> goto cleanup;
> }
> @@ -271,12 +258,12 @@ easy_pkcs7_sign(const char *content, siz
> /* Compute ex_kusage */
> X509_check_purpose(certificate, -1, 0);
>
> - if (check_ca(certificate)) {
> + if (X509_check_ca(certificate)) {
> warnx("CA keys are not valid for signatures");
> goto cleanup;
> }
>
> - if (certificate->ex_xkusage != pkg_key_usage) {
> + if (X509_get_extended_key_usage(certificate) != pkg_key_usage) {
> warnx("Certificate must have CODE SIGNING "
> "and EMAIL PROTECTION property");
> goto cleanup;
