+ *pcrl_score |= CRL_SCORE_AKID|CRL_SCORE_ISSUER_CERT;
+ *pissuer = crl_issuer;
+ return;
+ }
+ }
+
+ for (cidx++; cidx < sk_X509_num(ctx->chain); cidx++)
+ {
+ crl_issuer = sk_X509_value(ctx->chain, cidx);
+ if (X509_NAME_cmp(X509_get_subject_name(crl_issuer), cnm))
+ continue;
+ if (X509_check_akid(crl_issuer, crl->akid) == X509_V_OK)
+ {
+ *pcrl_score |= CRL_SCORE_AKID|CRL_SCORE_SAME_PATH;
+ *pissuer = crl_issuer;
+ return;
+ }
+ }
+
+ /* Anything else needs extended CRL support */
+
+ if (!(ctx->param->flags & X509_V_FLAG_EXTENDED_CRL_SUPPORT))
+ return;
+
+ /* Otherwise the CRL issuer is not on the path. Look for it in the
+ * set of untrusted certificates.
+ */
+ for (i = 0; i < sk_X509_num(ctx->untrusted); i++)
+ {
+ crl_issuer = sk_X509_value(ctx->untrusted, i);
+ if (X509_NAME_cmp(X509_get_subject_name(crl_issuer), cnm))
+ continue;
+ if (X509_check_akid(crl_issuer, crl->akid) == X509_V_OK)
+ {
+ *pissuer = crl_issuer;
+ *pcrl_score |= CRL_SCORE_AKID;
+ return;
+ }
+ }
+ }
+
+/* Check the path of a CRL issuer certificate. This creates a new
+ * X509_STORE_CTX and populates it with most of the parameters from the
+ * parent. This could be optimised somewhat since a lot of path checking
+ * will be duplicated by the parent, but this will rarely be used in
+ * practice.
+ */
+
+static int check_crl_path(X509_STORE_CTX *ctx, X509 *x)
+ {
+ X509_STORE_CTX crl_ctx;
+ int ret;
+ /* Don't allow recursive CRL path validation */
+ if (ctx->parent)
+ return 0;
+ if (!X509_STORE_CTX_init(&crl_ctx, ctx->ctx, x, ctx->untrusted))
+ return -1;
+
+ crl_ctx.crls = ctx->crls;
+ /* Copy verify params across */
+ X509_STORE_CTX_set0_param(&crl_ctx, ctx->param);
+
+ crl_ctx.parent = ctx;
+ crl_ctx.verify_cb = ctx->verify_cb;
+
+ /* Verify CRL issuer */
+ ret = X509_verify_cert(&crl_ctx);
+
+ if (!ret)
+ goto err;
+
+ /* Check chain is acceptable */
+
+ ret = check_crl_chain(ctx, ctx->chain, crl_ctx.chain);
+ err:
+ X509_STORE_CTX_cleanup(&crl_ctx);
+ return ret;
+ }
+
+/* RFC3280 says nothing about the relationship between CRL path
+ * and certificate path, which could lead to situations where a
+ * certificate could be revoked or validated by a CA not authorised
+ * to do so. RFC5280 is more strict and states that the two paths must
+ * end in the same trust anchor, though some discussions remain...
+ * until this is resolved we use the RFC5280 version
+ */
+
+static int check_crl_chain(X509_STORE_CTX *ctx,
+ STACK_OF(X509) *cert_path,
+ STACK_OF(X509) *crl_path)
+ {
+ X509 *cert_ta, *crl_ta;
+ cert_ta = sk_X509_value(cert_path, sk_X509_num(cert_path) - 1);
+ crl_ta = sk_X509_value(crl_path, sk_X509_num(crl_path) - 1);
+ if (!X509_cmp(cert_ta, crl_ta))
+ return 1;
+ return 0;
+ }
+
+/* Check for match between two dist point names: three separate cases.
+ * 1. Both are relative names and compare X509_NAME types.
+ * 2. One full, one relative. Compare X509_NAME to GENERAL_NAMES.
+ * 3. Both are full names and compare two GENERAL_NAMES.
+ * 4. One is NULL: automatic match.
+ */
+
+
+static int idp_check_dp(DIST_POINT_NAME *a, DIST_POINT_NAME *b)
+ {
+ X509_NAME *nm = NULL;
+ GENERAL_NAMES *gens = NULL;
+ GENERAL_NAME *gena, *genb;
+ int i, j;
+ if (!a || !b)
+ return 1;
+ if (a->type == 1)
+ {
+ if (!a->dpname)
+ return 0;
+ /* Case 1: two X509_NAME */
+ if (b->type == 1)
+ {
+ if (!b->dpname)
+ return 0;
+ if (!X509_NAME_cmp(a->dpname, b->dpname))
+ return 1;
+ else
+ return 0;
+ }
+ /* Case 2: set name and GENERAL_NAMES appropriately */
+ nm = a->dpname;
+ gens = b->name.fullname;
+ }
+ else if (b->type == 1)
+ {
+ if (!b->dpname)
+ return 0;
+ /* Case 2: set name and GENERAL_NAMES appropriately */
+ gens = a->name.fullname;
+ nm = b->dpname;
+ }
+
+ /* Handle case 2 with one GENERAL_NAMES and one X509_NAME */
+ if (nm)
+ {
+ for (i = 0; i < sk_GENERAL_NAME_num(gens); i++)
+ {
+ gena = sk_GENERAL_NAME_value(gens, i);
+ if (gena->type != GEN_DIRNAME)
+ continue;
+ if (!X509_NAME_cmp(nm, gena->d.directoryName))
+ return 1;