gnu: wpa-wupplicant: Update to 2.10 [security fixes].

See the upstream advisory for more information on the security fixes
contained in these updates:

https://w1.fi/security/2022-1/sae-eap-pwd-side-channel-attack-update-2.txt

* gnu/packages/admin.scm (wpa-supplicant-minimal): Update to 2.10.
[source]: Remove obsolete patches.
* gnu/packages/patches/wpa-supplicant-CVE-2021-27803.patch,
gnu/packages/patches/wpa-supplicant-CVE-2021-30004.patch: Delete files.
* gnu/local.mk (dist_patch_DATA): Remove them.

Signed-off-by: Tobias Geerinckx-Rice <me@tobias.gr>

2 files changed, 0 insertions, 165 deletions

diff --git a/gnu/packages/patches/wpa-supplicant-CVE-2021-27803.patch b/gnu/packages/patches/wpa-supplicant-CVE-2021-27803.patch
deleted file mode 100644
index 1942bb3d55..0000000000
--- a/gnu/packages/patches/wpa-supplicant-CVE-2021-27803.patch
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,50 +0,0 @@
-From 8460e3230988ef2ec13ce6b69b687e941f6cdb32 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
-From: Jouni Malinen <jouni@codeaurora.org>
-Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2020 23:52:50 +0200
-Subject: [PATCH] P2P: Fix a corner case in peer addition based on PD Request
-
-p2p_add_device() may remove the oldest entry if there is no room in the
-peer table for a new peer. This would result in any pointer to that
-removed entry becoming stale. A corner case with an invalid PD Request
-frame could result in such a case ending up using (read+write) freed
-memory. This could only by triggered when the peer table has reached its
-maximum size and the PD Request frame is received from the P2P Device
-Address of the oldest remaining entry and the frame has incorrect P2P
-Device Address in the payload.
-
-Fix this by fetching the dev pointer again after having called
-p2p_add_device() so that the stale pointer cannot be used.
-
-Fixes: 17bef1e97a50 ("P2P: Add peer entry based on Provision Discovery Request")
-Signed-off-by: Jouni Malinen <jouni@codeaurora.org>
----
- src/p2p/p2p_pd.c | 12 +++++-------
- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
-
-diff --git a/src/p2p/p2p_pd.c b/src/p2p/p2p_pd.c
-index 3994ec03f86b..05fd593494ef 100644
---- a/src/p2p/p2p_pd.c
-+++ b/src/p2p/p2p_pd.c
-@@ -595,14 +595,12 @@ void p2p_process_prov_disc_req(struct p2p_data *p2p, const u8 *sa,
- 			goto out;
- 		}
- 
-+		dev = p2p_get_device(p2p, sa);
- 		if (!dev) {
--			dev = p2p_get_device(p2p, sa);
--			if (!dev) {
--				p2p_dbg(p2p,
--					"Provision Discovery device not found "
--					MACSTR, MAC2STR(sa));
--				goto out;
--			}
-+			p2p_dbg(p2p,
-+				"Provision Discovery device not found "
-+				MACSTR, MAC2STR(sa));
-+			goto out;
- 		}
- 	} else if (msg.wfd_subelems) {
- 		wpabuf_free(dev->info.wfd_subelems);
--- 
-2.25.1
-
diff --git a/gnu/packages/patches/wpa-supplicant-CVE-2021-30004.patch b/gnu/packages/patches/wpa-supplicant-CVE-2021-30004.patch
deleted file mode 100644
index 8c8ba93355..0000000000
--- a/gnu/packages/patches/wpa-supplicant-CVE-2021-30004.patch
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,115 +0,0 @@
-From a0541334a6394f8237a4393b7372693cd7e96f15 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
-From: Jouni Malinen <j@w1.fi>
-Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2021 18:19:31 +0200
-Subject: ASN.1: Validate DigestAlgorithmIdentifier parameters
-
-The supported hash algorithms do not use AlgorithmIdentifier parameters.
-However, there are implementations that include NULL parameters in
-addition to ones that omit the parameters. Previous implementation did
-not check the parameters value at all which supported both these cases,
-but did not reject any other unexpected information.
-
-Use strict validation of digest algorithm parameters and reject any
-unexpected value when validating a signature. This is needed to prevent
-potential forging attacks.
-
-Signed-off-by: Jouni Malinen <j@w1.fi>
----
- src/tls/pkcs1.c  | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++
- src/tls/x509v3.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
- 2 files changed, 41 insertions(+)
-
-diff --git a/src/tls/pkcs1.c b/src/tls/pkcs1.c
-index bbdb0d7..5761dfe 100644
---- a/src/tls/pkcs1.c
-+++ b/src/tls/pkcs1.c
-@@ -244,6 +244,8 @@ int pkcs1_v15_sig_ver(struct crypto_public_key *pk,
- 		os_free(decrypted);
- 		return -1;
- 	}
-+	wpa_hexdump(MSG_MSGDUMP, "PKCS #1: DigestInfo",
-+		    hdr.payload, hdr.length);
- 
- 	pos = hdr.payload;
- 	end = pos + hdr.length;
-@@ -265,6 +267,8 @@ int pkcs1_v15_sig_ver(struct crypto_public_key *pk,
- 		os_free(decrypted);
- 		return -1;
- 	}
-+	wpa_hexdump(MSG_MSGDUMP, "PKCS #1: DigestAlgorithmIdentifier",
-+		    hdr.payload, hdr.length);
- 	da_end = hdr.payload + hdr.length;
- 
- 	if (asn1_get_oid(hdr.payload, hdr.length, &oid, &next)) {
-@@ -273,6 +277,23 @@ int pkcs1_v15_sig_ver(struct crypto_public_key *pk,
- 		os_free(decrypted);
- 		return -1;
- 	}
-+	wpa_hexdump(MSG_MSGDUMP, "PKCS #1: Digest algorithm parameters",
-+		    next, da_end - next);
-+
-+	/*
-+	 * RFC 5754: The correct encoding for the SHA2 algorithms would be to
-+	 * omit the parameters, but there are implementation that encode these
-+	 * as a NULL element. Allow these two cases and reject anything else.
-+	 */
-+	if (da_end > next &&
-+	    (asn1_get_next(next, da_end - next, &hdr) < 0 ||
-+	     !asn1_is_null(&hdr) ||
-+	     hdr.payload + hdr.length != da_end)) {
-+		wpa_printf(MSG_DEBUG,
-+			   "PKCS #1: Unexpected digest algorithm parameters");
-+		os_free(decrypted);
-+		return -1;
-+	}
- 
- 	if (!asn1_oid_equal(&oid, hash_alg)) {
- 		char txt[100], txt2[100];
-diff --git a/src/tls/x509v3.c b/src/tls/x509v3.c
-index a8944dd..df337ec 100644
---- a/src/tls/x509v3.c
-+++ b/src/tls/x509v3.c
-@@ -1964,6 +1964,7 @@ int x509_check_signature(struct x509_certificate *issuer,
- 		os_free(data);
- 		return -1;
- 	}
-+	wpa_hexdump(MSG_MSGDUMP, "X509: DigestInfo", hdr.payload, hdr.length);
- 
- 	pos = hdr.payload;
- 	end = pos + hdr.length;
-@@ -1985,6 +1986,8 @@ int x509_check_signature(struct x509_certificate *issuer,
- 		os_free(data);
- 		return -1;
- 	}
-+	wpa_hexdump(MSG_MSGDUMP, "X509: DigestAlgorithmIdentifier",
-+		    hdr.payload, hdr.length);
- 	da_end = hdr.payload + hdr.length;
- 
- 	if (asn1_get_oid(hdr.payload, hdr.length, &oid, &next)) {
-@@ -1992,6 +1995,23 @@ int x509_check_signature(struct x509_certificate *issuer,
- 		os_free(data);
- 		return -1;
- 	}
-+	wpa_hexdump(MSG_MSGDUMP, "X509: Digest algorithm parameters",
-+		    next, da_end - next);
-+
-+	/*
-+	 * RFC 5754: The correct encoding for the SHA2 algorithms would be to
-+	 * omit the parameters, but there are implementation that encode these
-+	 * as a NULL element. Allow these two cases and reject anything else.
-+	 */
-+	if (da_end > next &&
-+	    (asn1_get_next(next, da_end - next, &hdr) < 0 ||
-+	     !asn1_is_null(&hdr) ||
-+	     hdr.payload + hdr.length != da_end)) {
-+		wpa_printf(MSG_DEBUG,
-+			   "X509: Unexpected digest algorithm parameters");
-+		os_free(data);
-+		return -1;
-+	}
- 
- 	if (x509_sha1_oid(&oid)) {
- 		if (signature->oid.oid[6] != 5 /* sha-1WithRSAEncryption */) {
--- 
-cgit v0.12
-