The function in charge of removing duplicate ORPorts from our configured ports
was skipping all non ORPorts port but only for the outer loop thus resulting
in comparing an ORPort with a non-ORPort which lead to problems.
For example, tor configured with the following would fail:
ORPort auto
DirPort auto
Both end up being the same configuration except that one is a OR listener and
one is a Dir listener. Thus because of the missing check in the inner loop,
they looked exactly the same and thus one is removed.
Fixes#40195
Signed-off-by: David Goulet <dgoulet@torproject.org>
Commit c3a0f75796 added this feature for ORPort
that we ignore any port that is not the family of our default address when
parsing the port. So if port_parse_config() was called with an IPv4 default
address, all IPv6 address would be ignored.
That makes sense for ORPort since we call twice port_parse_config() for
0.0.0.0 and [::] but for the rest of the ports, it is not good since a
perfectly valid configuration can be:
SocksPort 9050
SocksPort [::1]:9050
Any non-ORPort only binds by default to an IPv4 except the ORPort that binds
to both IPv4 and IPv6 by default.
The fix here is to always parse all ports within port_parse_config() and then,
specifically for ORPort, remove the duplicates or superseding ones. The
warning is only emitted when a port supersedes another.
A unit tests is added to make sure SocksPort of different family always exists
together.
Fixes#40183
Signed-off-by: David Goulet <dgoulet@torproject.org>
We already did this, but we did it by accident, which is pretty
risky: if we hadn't, then our code would have treated extra data in
the inbuf as having been transmitted as TLS-authenticated data.
Closes ticket 40017; Found by opara.
Previously, hashlib.shake_256 was a class (if present); now it can
also be a function. This change invalidated our old
compatibility/workaround code, and made one of our tests fail.
Fixes bug 40179; bugfix on 0.3.1.6-rc when the workaround code was
added.
It turns out that STAP_PROBEV() is not available on FreeBSD thus having
sdt/sdt.h is not enough. Look for it now at configure time.
Closes#40174
Signed-off-by: David Goulet <dgoulet@torproject.org>
The loop in the earlier patch would invoke undefined behavior in two
ways: First, it would check whether it was looking at a space before
it checked whether the pointer was in-range. Second, it would let a
pointer reach a position _before_ the start of a string, which is
not allowed.
I've removed the assertion about empty messages: empty messages can
be their own warning IMO.
I've also added tests for this formatting code, to make sure it
actually works.
