summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/dev-libs/openssl/files
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorV3n3RiX <venerix@koprulu.sector>2023-06-15 13:38:09 +0100
committerV3n3RiX <venerix@koprulu.sector>2023-06-15 13:38:09 +0100
commitdb70871b2044b9bfde346d6f4027dafb0a013c4c (patch)
tree34548aee54e5458d3754bd8c8f987acdb5ee444c /dev-libs/openssl/files
parent1c382dc5dbc52576ac2300fee0498af8af44e7b4 (diff)
gentoo auto-resync : 15:06:2023 - 13:38:09
Diffstat (limited to 'dev-libs/openssl/files')
-rw-r--r--dev-libs/openssl/files/openssl-1.1.1t-CVE-2023-0464.patch215
-rw-r--r--dev-libs/openssl/files/openssl-1.1.1t-CVE-2023-0465.patch48
-rw-r--r--dev-libs/openssl/files/openssl-1.1.1t-CVE-2023-0466.patch41
-rw-r--r--dev-libs/openssl/files/openssl-3.0.8-CVE-2023-0464.patch214
-rw-r--r--dev-libs/openssl/files/openssl-3.0.8-CVE-2023-0465.patch46
-rw-r--r--dev-libs/openssl/files/openssl-3.0.8-CVE-2023-0466.patch41
-rw-r--r--dev-libs/openssl/files/openssl-3.0.8-CVE-2023-1255.patch40
-rw-r--r--dev-libs/openssl/files/openssl-3.0.8-mips-cflags.patch30
-rw-r--r--dev-libs/openssl/files/openssl-3.1.0-CVE-2023-0464.patch214
-rw-r--r--dev-libs/openssl/files/openssl-3.1.0-CVE-2023-0465.patch46
-rw-r--r--dev-libs/openssl/files/openssl-3.1.0-CVE-2023-0466.patch41
-rw-r--r--dev-libs/openssl/files/openssl-3.1.0-CVE-2023-1255.patch40
12 files changed, 0 insertions, 1016 deletions
diff --git a/dev-libs/openssl/files/openssl-1.1.1t-CVE-2023-0464.patch b/dev-libs/openssl/files/openssl-1.1.1t-CVE-2023-0464.patch
deleted file mode 100644
index 950e6572cd28..000000000000
--- a/dev-libs/openssl/files/openssl-1.1.1t-CVE-2023-0464.patch
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,215 +0,0 @@
-commit 879f7080d7e141f415c79eaa3a8ac4a3dad0348b
-Author: Pauli <pauli@openssl.org>
-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 <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)
diff --git a/dev-libs/openssl/files/openssl-1.1.1t-CVE-2023-0465.patch b/dev-libs/openssl/files/openssl-1.1.1t-CVE-2023-0465.patch
deleted file mode 100644
index c332e0bd2c9f..000000000000
--- a/dev-libs/openssl/files/openssl-1.1.1t-CVE-2023-0465.patch
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,48 +0,0 @@
-commit b013765abfa80036dc779dd0e50602c57bb3bf95
-Author: Matt Caswell <matt@openssl.org>
-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 <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) {
diff --git a/dev-libs/openssl/files/openssl-1.1.1t-CVE-2023-0466.patch b/dev-libs/openssl/files/openssl-1.1.1t-CVE-2023-0466.patch
deleted file mode 100644
index 9a59d2846a48..000000000000
--- a/dev-libs/openssl/files/openssl-1.1.1t-CVE-2023-0466.patch
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,41 +0,0 @@
-commit 0d16b7e99aafc0b4a6d729eec65a411a7e025f0a
-Author: Tomas Mraz <tomas@openssl.org>
-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: Matt Caswell <matt@openssl.org>
- Reviewed-by: Paul Dale <pauli@openssl.org>
- (Merged from https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/20564)
-
-diff --git a/doc/man3/X509_VERIFY_PARAM_set_flags.pod b/doc/man3/X509_VERIFY_PARAM_set_flags.pod
-index f6f304bf7b..aa292f9336 100644
---- a/doc/man3/X509_VERIFY_PARAM_set_flags.pod
-+++ b/doc/man3/X509_VERIFY_PARAM_set_flags.pod
-@@ -92,8 +92,9 @@ B<trust>.
- X509_VERIFY_PARAM_set_time() sets the verification time in B<param> to
- B<t>. Normally the current time is used.
-
--X509_VERIFY_PARAM_add0_policy() enables policy checking (it is disabled
--by default) and adds B<policy> to the acceptable policy set.
-+X509_VERIFY_PARAM_add0_policy() adds B<policy> 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<policies>. 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.
diff --git a/dev-libs/openssl/files/openssl-3.0.8-CVE-2023-0464.patch b/dev-libs/openssl/files/openssl-3.0.8-CVE-2023-0464.patch
deleted file mode 100644
index 3cf1d3b38ec9..000000000000
--- a/dev-libs/openssl/files/openssl-3.0.8-CVE-2023-0464.patch
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,214 +0,0 @@
-commit 959c59c7a0164117e7f8366466a32bb1f8d77ff1
-Author: Pauli <pauli@openssl.org>
-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 <tomas@openssl.org>
- Reviewed-by: Shane Lontis <shane.lontis@oracle.com>
- (Merged from https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/20568)
-
-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-3.0.8-CVE-2023-0465.patch b/dev-libs/openssl/files/openssl-3.0.8-CVE-2023-0465.patch
deleted file mode 100644
index 852706d8aa92..000000000000
--- a/dev-libs/openssl/files/openssl-3.0.8-CVE-2023-0465.patch
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,46 +0,0 @@
-commit 1dd43e0709fece299b15208f36cc7c76209ba0bb
-Author: Matt Caswell <matt@openssl.org>
-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 <hlandau@openssl.org>
- Reviewed-by: Tomas Mraz <tomas@openssl.org>
- (Merged from https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/20587)
-
-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-3.0.8-CVE-2023-0466.patch b/dev-libs/openssl/files/openssl-3.0.8-CVE-2023-0466.patch
deleted file mode 100644
index c71665d82e18..000000000000
--- a/dev-libs/openssl/files/openssl-3.0.8-CVE-2023-0466.patch
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,41 +0,0 @@
-commit 51e8a84ce742db0f6c70510d0159dad8f7825908
-Author: Tomas Mraz <tomas@openssl.org>
-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: Matt Caswell <matt@openssl.org>
- Reviewed-by: Paul Dale <pauli@openssl.org>
- (Merged from https://github.com/openssl/openssl/pull/20563)
-
-diff --git a/doc/man3/X509_VERIFY_PARAM_set_flags.pod b/doc/man3/X509_VERIFY_PARAM_set_flags.pod
-index 75a1677022..43c1900bca 100644
---- a/doc/man3/X509_VERIFY_PARAM_set_flags.pod
-+++ b/doc/man3/X509_VERIFY_PARAM_set_flags.pod
-@@ -98,8 +98,9 @@ B<trust>.
- X509_VERIFY_PARAM_set_time() sets the verification time in B<param> to
- B<t>. Normally the current time is used.
-
--X509_VERIFY_PARAM_add0_policy() enables policy checking (it is disabled
--by default) and adds B<policy> to the acceptable policy set.
-+X509_VERIFY_PARAM_add0_policy() adds B<policy> 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<policies>. 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.
diff --git a/dev-libs/openssl/files/openssl-3.0.8-CVE-2023-1255.patch b/dev-libs/openssl/files/openssl-3.0.8-CVE-2023-1255.patch
deleted file mode 100644
index 9b1a657d51be..000000000000
--- a/dev-libs/openssl/files/openssl-3.0.8-CVE-2023-1255.patch
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,40 +0,0 @@
-commit 02ac9c9420275868472f33b01def01218742b8bb
-Author: Tomas Mraz <tomas@openssl.org>
-Date: Mon Apr 17 16:51:20 2023 +0200
-
- 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 <pauli@openssl.org>
- Reviewed-by: Tom Cosgrove <tom.cosgrove@arm.com>
- (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:
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
deleted file mode 100644
index 111681f27d07..000000000000
--- a/dev-libs/openssl/files/openssl-3.0.8-mips-cflags.patch
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,30 +0,0 @@
-https://bugs.gentoo.org/894140
-https://github.com/openssl/openssl/issues/20214
-
-From d500b51791cd56e73065e3a7f4487fc33f31c91c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
-From: Mike Gilbert <floppym@gentoo.org>
-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
deleted file mode 100644
index dfe83e53d0ad..000000000000
--- a/dev-libs/openssl/files/openssl-3.1.0-CVE-2023-0464.patch
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,214 +0,0 @@
-commit 2017771e2db3e2b96f89bbe8766c3209f6a99545
-Author: Pauli <pauli@openssl.org>
-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 <tomas@openssl.org>
- Reviewed-by: Shane Lontis <shane.lontis@oracle.com>
- (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
deleted file mode 100644
index a98f7cba13bd..000000000000
--- a/dev-libs/openssl/files/openssl-3.1.0-CVE-2023-0465.patch
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,46 +0,0 @@
-commit facfb1ab745646e97a1920977ae4a9965ea61d5c
-Author: Matt Caswell <matt@openssl.org>
-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 <hlandau@openssl.org>
- Reviewed-by: Tomas Mraz <tomas@openssl.org>
- (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
deleted file mode 100644
index 9a315f4c00fd..000000000000
--- a/dev-libs/openssl/files/openssl-3.1.0-CVE-2023-0466.patch
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,41 +0,0 @@
-commit fc814a30fc4f0bc54fcea7d9a7462f5457aab061
-Author: Tomas Mraz <tomas@openssl.org>
-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 <pauli@openssl.org>
- Reviewed-by: Matt Caswell <matt@openssl.org>
- (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<trust>.
- X509_VERIFY_PARAM_set_time() sets the verification time in B<param> to
- B<t>. Normally the current time is used.
-
--X509_VERIFY_PARAM_add0_policy() enables policy checking (it is disabled
--by default) and adds B<policy> to the acceptable policy set.
-+X509_VERIFY_PARAM_add0_policy() adds B<policy> 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<policies>. 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.
diff --git a/dev-libs/openssl/files/openssl-3.1.0-CVE-2023-1255.patch b/dev-libs/openssl/files/openssl-3.1.0-CVE-2023-1255.patch
deleted file mode 100644
index aea425f83556..000000000000
--- a/dev-libs/openssl/files/openssl-3.1.0-CVE-2023-1255.patch
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,40 +0,0 @@
-commit bc2f61ad70971869b242fc1cb445b98bad50074a
-Author: Tomas Mraz <tomas@openssl.org>
-Date: Mon Apr 17 16:51:20 2023 +0200
-
- 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 <pauli@openssl.org>
- Reviewed-by: Tom Cosgrove <tom.cosgrove@arm.com>
- (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 ea74217317..efd3ccd1a4 100755
---- a/crypto/aes/asm/aesv8-armx.pl
-+++ b/crypto/aes/asm/aesv8-armx.pl
-@@ -3367,7 +3367,7 @@ $code.=<<___ if ($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
-@@ -3376,6 +3376,8 @@ $code.=<<___ if ($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: