From patchwork Fri Sep 11 14:18:15 2026 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Vijay Anusuri X-Patchwork-Id: 97967 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 3C04AC88E45 for ; Fri, 11 Sep 2026 14:18:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-pj1-f44.google.com (mail-pj1-f44.google.com [209.85.216.44]) by mx.groups.io with SMTP id smtpd.msgproc01-g2.40616.1789136315183009096 for ; Fri, 11 Sep 2026 07:18:35 -0700 Authentication-Results: mx.groups.io; dkim=pass header.i=@mvista.com header.s=google header.b=iGdFNVwG; spf=pass (domain: mvista.com, ip: 209.85.216.44, mailfrom: vanusuri@mvista.com) Received: by mail-pj1-f44.google.com with SMTP id 98e67ed59e1d1-38ec1402b05so905846a91.2 for ; Fri, 11 Sep 2026 07:18:35 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mvista.com; s=google; t=1789136314; x=1789741114; darn=lists.openembedded.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:date:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to:content-type; bh=DF5UNBjJZ7+sWHJQfi/gTneb8YcIPLwJwC+dwpGccsQ=; b=iGdFNVwG6DMuVc1elY3clv3NYO/6zdHwJL65DTNaWeuYM7a2PzIgBPrfZ9jcyDwG6p 9y2wXXOsUsHHGEETZkybr6PZ3ib64Uz18XKvEehPJufueztk01ek+MQEAOEV2qL1Erj5 fCaB2KDtkHvqGguCvjFpR/hZ1Qy370CISR4rQ= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20251104; t=1789136314; x=1789741114; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:date:subject:cc:to:from:x-gm-gg:x-gm-message-state:from :to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to:content-type; bh=DF5UNBjJZ7+sWHJQfi/gTneb8YcIPLwJwC+dwpGccsQ=; b=YDlR+CHhIIYcRs+CCj79GdHO4TGE7JQ86GEzCWo8vroYVl5z/OQyhvhedxUh57FxN9 xHFYS60w5clmD70B8Tb9OmpOp90PETBBWr4LulDl/cofpwn6w8xcym18znPIVtAlfREk AdtU/YA3ssEtjrpBVBo1uuuJ92g/zejRjXsHTlowSUv08aT+p6P76YIkJOg34sjdedZp 8dbOxAQQiDanpX2A35P8VHWhLxWoJMkahZGA+I/S8r3hK47+2KXvkbKaGbQUS/exjVYP 8P1/WmYbTKpw0x1I0+VT4yU+Kg0QgoK/p5mSmiYJFlqG3idTfluOHMYuMj3rboueR58g VDEw== X-Gm-Message-State: AFuF++lTIQfKobkFB953H5KFjg/EGEInUSdy0lSYWz/4L75NutywoBgw 3eXV5IRcHCp0TPrdzyBVT0FaGltGn03byz2lIUgCUdKzlXfYYiryc/FOV+0zwSowGJr7CmotnOj O4KoT X-Gm-Gg: AYBFou37ExaKdcV9lV8Dmroc3ISjTQAox2TeYalHHBIY3TCu9D2xTSdZKRUqBWad8ou zouz2AQd3XISDfEk1/770LW50hqSkNUVnMEhlXMqT6ixZEhf9TNXiMdsmZVTfMgbSKzI8AqqChJ xFn1Yg+jikSiFOx3Yhpx+KlO0bRfvug4CPFkILanYQtI5YWZhX/uFlwg2ZK0pqE6tt4Gsx/8lyV XXR0tG61kEpkF1tNkf9vyS4m5M+aj8upMtUCnLhEK9aZeV3MDkp6K5Bh61kl35UFn6ETJfao9rc Bq16OmTEDsBzZsayePzsSga6GdigM5YP5zoMuEnKknR/D1DlGsJoLmSq3TjzrD34yqDFzzwrBra AFCAzFuCtarkMEAQoydn4tU9UVfDZ31QwgajDrzuw5h8wTAbFq9jgU7hjWa71Sca+CbiQ3dHwDm 0mESj0iY6j1XSnx2YOykXb+jdxhPOMYq7YdyBTb4pNxB5rjvVbieMIztbXaGrVgMGAYZ/+ygvu2 0s= X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:1d45:b0:398:9be9:ab8f with SMTP id 98e67ed59e1d1-39d9c21cf40mr7493715a91.20.1789136314319; Fri, 11 Sep 2026 07:18:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from MVIN00352.. ([2401:4900:1f28:4681:c629:eec8:3fba:5347]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 5a478bee46e88-33ba4e9a3casm7020102eec.12.2026.09.11.07.18.32 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 11 Sep 2026 07:18:33 -0700 (PDT) From: Vijay Anusuri To: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org Cc: Vijay Anusuri Subject: [OE-core][wrynose][patch 2/2] python3-cryptography: Fix CVE-2026-69249 Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2026 19:48:15 +0530 Message-ID: <20260911141815.1479412-2-vanusuri@mvista.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.43.0 In-Reply-To: <20260911141815.1479412-1-vanusuri@mvista.com> References: <20260911141815.1479412-1-vanusuri@mvista.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 List-Id: X-Webhook-Received: from 45-33-107-173.ip.linodeusercontent.com [45.33.107.173] by aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org with HTTPS for ; Fri, 11 Sep 2026 14:18:36 -0000 X-Groupsio-URL: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/245654 Pick patch according to [2] [1] https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/cve-2026-69249 [2] https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/CVE-2026-69249 Signed-off-by: Vijay Anusuri --- .../python/python3-cryptography.bb | 1 + .../python3-cryptography/CVE-2026-69249.patch | 338 ++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 339 insertions(+) create mode 100644 meta/recipes-devtools/python/python3-cryptography/CVE-2026-69249.patch diff --git a/meta/recipes-devtools/python/python3-cryptography.bb b/meta/recipes-devtools/python/python3-cryptography.bb index 5c1de9192b..f3cb755ed5 100644 --- a/meta/recipes-devtools/python/python3-cryptography.bb +++ b/meta/recipes-devtools/python/python3-cryptography.bb @@ -16,6 +16,7 @@ SRC_URI[sha256sum] = "e4cfd68c5f3e0bfdad0d38e023239b96a2fe84146481852dffbcca442c SRC_URI += "file://0001-pyproject.toml-remove-benchmark-disable-option.patch \ file://0002-Fix-installing-stray-files-into-site-packages.patch \ file://CVE-2026-69248.patch \ + file://CVE-2026-69249.patch \ file://check-memfree.py \ file://run-ptest \ " diff --git a/meta/recipes-devtools/python/python3-cryptography/CVE-2026-69249.patch b/meta/recipes-devtools/python/python3-cryptography/CVE-2026-69249.patch new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..f700d3f1ee --- /dev/null +++ b/meta/recipes-devtools/python/python3-cryptography/CVE-2026-69249.patch @@ -0,0 +1,338 @@ +From 4a12cf49675a184e47f912b00b04f3a629283582 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 +From: William Woodruff +Date: Sat, 6 Jun 2026 23:30:03 -0400 +Subject: [PATCH] Add a signature validation budget during path construction + (#14960) + +* Add a signature validation budget during path construction + +This extends our existing NC budget check to include a budget +for signature validations. If a path construction exceeds the +budget by performing more than the allowed number of signature +validation steps, the entire construction fails. + +For now, our budget is 128 signature validations. This is +consistent with (higher than) Go and rustls-webpki, which +both set a limit of 100. Like Go, we attempt to make the "best" +use of our signature budget by ordering by likelihood, using +AKI/SKI match as the strongest signal of fitness. + +* Bump limbo + +* Temporary commit + +* Revert "Temporary commit" + +This reverts commit bcdb6808562a8b8f484f85d21cb201cfdb2bbbd7. + +* Fudge a coverage test into place + +* Coverage for the coverage god + +Upstream-Status: Backport [https://github.com/pyca/cryptography/commit/4a12cf49675a184e47f912b00b04f3a629283582] +CVE: CVE-2026-69249 +Signed-off-by: Vijay Anusuri +--- + .../cryptography-x509-verification/src/lib.rs | 183 +++++++++++++++++- + .../src/policy/mod.rs | 9 +- + 2 files changed, 182 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) + +diff --git a/src/rust/cryptography-x509-verification/src/lib.rs b/src/rust/cryptography-x509-verification/src/lib.rs +index 60c89d4..7ee3bb0 100644 +--- a/src/rust/cryptography-x509-verification/src/lib.rs ++++ b/src/rust/cryptography-x509-verification/src/lib.rs +@@ -18,10 +18,14 @@ use std::vec; + use asn1::ObjectIdentifier; + use cryptography_x509::common::Asn1Read; + use cryptography_x509::extensions::{ +- DuplicateExtensionsError, Extensions, NameConstraints, SubjectAlternativeName, ++ AuthorityKeyIdentifier, DuplicateExtensionsError, Extensions, NameConstraints, ++ SubjectAlternativeName, + }; + use cryptography_x509::name::GeneralName; +-use cryptography_x509::oid::{NAME_CONSTRAINTS_OID, SUBJECT_ALTERNATIVE_NAME_OID}; ++use cryptography_x509::oid::{ ++ AUTHORITY_KEY_IDENTIFIER_OID, NAME_CONSTRAINTS_OID, SUBJECT_ALTERNATIVE_NAME_OID, ++ SUBJECT_KEY_IDENTIFIER_OID, ++}; + + use crate::certificate::cert_is_self_issued; + use crate::ops::{CryptoOps, VerificationCertificate}; +@@ -98,15 +102,23 @@ impl Display for ValidationError<'_, B> { + + struct Budget { + name_constraint_checks: usize, ++ signature_checks: usize, + } + + impl Budget { +- // Same limit as other validators ++ // The maximum number of name constraint checks performed when attempting ++ // path construction. This is the same limit as other validators. + const DEFAULT_NAME_CONSTRAINT_CHECK_LIMIT: usize = 1 << 20; + ++ // The maximum number of signature verifications performed when attempting ++ // path construction. The is similar to other validators: ++ // both Go and rustls-webpki pick 100. ++ const DEFAULT_SIGNATURE_CHECK_LIMIT: usize = 1 << 7; ++ + fn new() -> Budget { + Budget { + name_constraint_checks: Self::DEFAULT_NAME_CONSTRAINT_CHECK_LIMIT, ++ signature_checks: Self::DEFAULT_SIGNATURE_CHECK_LIMIT, + } + } + +@@ -119,6 +131,15 @@ impl Budget { + })?; + Ok(()) + } ++ ++ fn signature_check<'chain, B: CryptoOps>(&mut self) -> ValidationResult<'chain, (), B> { ++ self.signature_checks = self.signature_checks.checked_sub(1).ok_or_else(|| { ++ ValidationError::new(ValidationErrorKind::FatalError( ++ "Exceeded maximum signature check limit", ++ )) ++ })?; ++ Ok(()) ++ } + } + + struct NameChain<'a, 'chain> { +@@ -341,18 +362,57 @@ impl<'a, 'chain, B: CryptoOps> ChainBuilder<'a, 'chain, B> { + } + } + ++ /// Identify and return potential issuers for `cert`, considering ++ /// candidates from both the trusted store and untrusted intermediate set. ++ /// Trusted candidates are returned before untrusted intermediate ++ /// candidates, and both groups are opportunisitically ordered by ++ /// "likeliness" in terms of AKI/SKI match. + fn potential_issuers( + &self, + cert: &'a VerificationCertificate<'chain, B>, +- ) -> impl Iterator> + '_ { +- // TODO: Optimizations: +- // * Search by AKI and other identifiers? +- self.store ++ cert_extensions: &Extensions<'chain>, ++ ) -> Vec<&'a VerificationCertificate<'chain, B>> { ++ let mut candidates: Vec<&'a VerificationCertificate<'chain, B>> = self ++ .store + .get_by_subject(&cert.certificate().tbs_cert.issuer) + .iter() + .chain(self.intermediates.iter().filter(|&candidate| { + candidate.certificate().subject() == cert.certificate().issuer() + })) ++ .collect(); ++ ++ let want_kid: Option<&[u8]> = cert_extensions ++ .get_extension(&AUTHORITY_KEY_IDENTIFIER_OID) ++ .and_then(|ext| ext.value::>().ok()) ++ .and_then(|aki| aki.key_identifier); ++ ++ // This mirrors Go's `findPotentialParents`: we have a global ++ // signature budget, so we want to bucket candidates by likeliness ++ // to avoid wasting budget on (potentially adversarial) name collisions. ++ // ++ // Observe that we use a stable sort to preserve trusted candidates ++ // before untrusted candidates in each likeliness bucket. In other ++ // words, we always try a likely trusted candidate over an equally ++ // likely untrusted one. ++ // ++ // See: ++ candidates.sort_by_key(|candidate| { ++ let have_kid: Option<&[u8]> = ++ candidate.certificate().extensions().ok().and_then(|exts| { ++ exts.get_extension(&SUBJECT_KEY_IDENTIFIER_OID) ++ .and_then(|ext| ext.value::<&[u8]>().ok()) ++ }); ++ ++ match (want_kid, have_kid) { ++ // cert AKID matches candidate SKID, highest likelihood. ++ (Some(want), Some(have)) if want == have => 0, ++ // cert AKID and candidate SKID don't match, lowest likelihood. ++ (Some(_), Some(_)) => 2, ++ // cert AKID and/or candidate SKID is not present, medium likelihood. ++ _ => 1u8, ++ } ++ }); ++ candidates + } + + fn build_chain_inner( +@@ -385,7 +445,8 @@ impl<'a, 'chain, B: CryptoOps> ChainBuilder<'a, 'chain, B> { + // Otherwise, we collect a list of potential issuers for this cert, + // and continue with the first that verifies. + let mut last_err: Option> = None; +- for issuing_cert_candidate in self.potential_issuers(working_cert) { ++ for issuing_cert_candidate in self.potential_issuers(working_cert, working_cert_extensions) ++ { + // A candidate issuer is said to verify if it both + // signs for the working certificate and conforms to the + // policy. +@@ -395,6 +456,7 @@ impl<'a, 'chain, B: CryptoOps> ChainBuilder<'a, 'chain, B> { + working_cert, + current_depth, + &issuer_extensions, ++ budget, + ) { + Ok(_) => { + match self.build_chain_inner( +@@ -503,10 +565,15 @@ impl<'a, 'chain, B: CryptoOps> ChainBuilder<'a, 'chain, B> { + #[cfg(test)] + mod tests { + use asn1::ParseError; ++ use cryptography_x509::certificate::Certificate; + use cryptography_x509::oid::SUBJECT_ALTERNATIVE_NAME_OID; + + use crate::certificate::tests::PublicKeyErrorOps; +- use crate::{ValidationError, ValidationErrorKind}; ++ use crate::ops::{CryptoOps, VerificationCertificate}; ++ use crate::policy::{Policy, PolicyDefinition, Subject}; ++ use crate::trust_store::Store; ++ use crate::types::DNSName; ++ use crate::{Budget, ChainBuilder, NameChain, ValidationError, ValidationErrorKind}; + + #[test] + fn test_validationerror_display() { +@@ -528,4 +595,102 @@ mod tests { + ValidationError::::new(ValidationErrorKind::FatalError("oops")); + assert_eq!(err.to_string(), "fatal error: oops"); + } ++ ++ /// A `CryptoOps` whose public key extraction and signature verification ++ /// always succeed, so that `valid_issuer` can be driven to completion ++ /// without real cryptographic material. ++ struct NullOps; ++ ++ impl CryptoOps for NullOps { ++ type Key = (); ++ type Err = (); ++ type CertificateExtra = (); ++ type PolicyExtra = (); ++ ++ fn public_key(&self, _cert: &Certificate<'_>) -> Result { ++ Ok(()) ++ } ++ ++ fn verify_signed_by( ++ &self, ++ _cert: &Certificate<'_>, ++ _key: &Self::Key, ++ ) -> Result<(), Self::Err> { ++ Ok(()) ++ } ++ ++ fn clone_public_key(_key: &Self::Key) -> Self::Key {} ++ ++ fn clone_extra(_extra: &Self::CertificateExtra) -> Self::CertificateExtra {} ++ } ++ ++ #[test] ++ fn test_clone() { ++ assert_eq!(NullOps::clone_public_key(&()), ()); ++ assert_eq!(NullOps::clone_extra(&()), ()); ++ } ++ ++ // A self-issued ("looping") CA certificate that is its own issuer. ++ fn looping_ca_pem() -> pem::Pem { ++ pem::parse( ++ "-----BEGIN CERTIFICATE----- ++MIIBcjCCARmgAwIBAgIBATAKBggqhkjOPQQDAjAhMR8wHQYDVQQDDBZsb29waW5n ++IHNlbGYtc2lnbmVkIENBMB4XDTIzMTIzMTAwMDAwMFoXDTI0MDEzMTAwMDAwMFow ++ITEfMB0GA1UEAwwWbG9vcGluZyBzZWxmLXNpZ25lZCBDQTBZMBMGByqGSM49AgEG ++CCqGSM49AwEHA0IABKAoXUGnHdfXJbSXjRjeW+PCVHmlo4KEki69N5pJUA0QyQMR ++v9ySOMnWf3Ea7TR4g3zdguwTP7LdpSku3uR1QkmjQjBAMA8GA1UdEwEB/wQFMAMB ++Af8wDgYDVR0PAQH/BAQDAgGGMB0GA1UdDgQWBBR23MGdG1Ma9iR+3CxKTafD/OE0 ++dTAKBggqhkjOPQQDAgNHADBEAiA4RCr07KfZdM16VfGNZAQFjvC60SWIU3RRVY/L ++qolIOwIgCaIgj9ipK0Q0p+45UJiq+L/ncrxsweJkFq/UYubzhX0= ++-----END CERTIFICATE-----", ++ ) ++ .unwrap() ++ } ++ ++ /// Exercises our pathlen overflow error scenario. ++ /// ++ /// This condition is logically unreachable from Python, since ++ /// we unconditionally limit signature checks to a number smaller ++ /// than `u8::MAX`, meaning that we always exhaust the signature budget ++ /// before potentially exhausting the pathlen budget. ++ /// ++ /// To test that directly, we manually lift the signature budget ++ /// and start our pathlen state right at `u8::MAX`, guaranteeing ++ /// an overflow on the immediate chain building step. ++ #[test] ++ fn test_build_chain_inner_depth_overflow() { ++ let pem = looping_ca_pem(); ++ let ca = asn1::parse_single::>(pem.contents()).unwrap(); ++ let ca_exts = ca.extensions().ok().unwrap(); ++ ++ // The same self-issued CA is both the working certificate and its own ++ // (only) candidate issuer, so the search recurses on itself. ++ let working = VerificationCertificate::::new(&ca, ()); ++ let intermediates = [VerificationCertificate::::new(&ca, ())]; ++ let store: Store<'_, NullOps> = Store::new([]); ++ ++ let subject = Subject::DNS(DNSName::new("example.com").unwrap()); ++ let time = asn1::DateTime::new(2024, 1, 1, 0, 0, 0).unwrap(); ++ let policy_def = ++ PolicyDefinition::server(NullOps, subject, time, Some(u8::MAX), None, None).unwrap(); ++ let policy = Policy::new(&policy_def, ()); ++ ++ let builder = ChainBuilder::new(&intermediates, &policy, &store); ++ let mut budget = Budget { ++ name_constraint_checks: usize::MAX, ++ signature_checks: usize::MAX, ++ }; ++ ++ let name_chain = NameChain::new::(None, &ca_exts, false) ++ .ok() ++ .unwrap(); ++ let err = builder ++ .build_chain_inner(&working, u8::MAX, &ca_exts, name_chain, &mut budget) ++ .unwrap_err(); ++ ++ assert!(matches!( ++ err.kind, ++ ValidationErrorKind::Other(msg) if msg.contains("current depth calculation overflowed") ++ )); ++ } + } +diff --git a/src/rust/cryptography-x509-verification/src/policy/mod.rs b/src/rust/cryptography-x509-verification/src/policy/mod.rs +index 1d82e4b..b3a1f08 100644 +--- a/src/rust/cryptography-x509-verification/src/policy/mod.rs ++++ b/src/rust/cryptography-x509-verification/src/policy/mod.rs +@@ -30,7 +30,9 @@ pub use crate::policy::extension::{ + PresentExtensionValidatorCallback, + }; + use crate::types::{DNSName, DNSPattern, IPAddress}; +-use crate::{ValidationError, ValidationErrorKind, ValidationResult, VerificationCertificate}; ++use crate::{ ++ Budget, ValidationError, ValidationErrorKind, ValidationResult, VerificationCertificate, ++}; + + // RSA key constraints, as defined in CA/B 6.1.5. + const WEBPKI_MINIMUM_RSA_MODULUS: usize = 2048; +@@ -503,6 +505,7 @@ impl<'a, B: CryptoOps> Policy<'a, B> { + child: &VerificationCertificate<'chain, B>, + current_depth: u8, + issuer_extensions: &Extensions<'_>, ++ budget: &mut Budget, + ) -> ValidationResult<'chain, (), B> { + // The issuer needs to be a valid CA at the current depth. + self.permits_ca(issuer, current_depth, issuer_extensions) +@@ -563,6 +566,10 @@ impl<'a, B: CryptoOps> Policy<'a, B> { + } + } + ++ // Charge the (potentially expensive) signature verification against the ++ // budget before performing it, bounding the total work an attacker can ++ // force during chain building. ++ budget.signature_check()?; + if self.ops.verify_signed_by(child.certificate(), pk).is_err() { + return Err(ValidationError::new(ValidationErrorKind::Other( + "signature does not match".to_string(), +-- +2.43.0 +