Right now, all our curve25519 backends ignore the high bit of the
public key. But possibly, others could treat the high bit of the
public key as encoding out-of-bounds values, or as something to be
preserved. This could be used to distinguish clients with different
backends, at the cost of killing a circuit.
As a workaround, let's just clear the high bit of each public key
indiscriminately before we use it. Fix for bug 8121, reported by
rransom. Bugfix on 0.2.4.8-alpha.
If we're deciding on a node's bandwidth based on "Bandwidth="
declarations, clip it to "20" or to the maxunmeasuredbw parameter,
if it's voted on.
This adds a new consensus method.
This is "part A" of bug 2286
Authorities don't set is_possible_guard on node_t, so they were
never deciding that they could build enough paths. This is a quick
and dirty fix.
Bug not in any released version of Tor
These seem to have gotten conflicted out of existence while mike was
working on path bias stuff.
Thanks to sysrqb for collecting these in a handy patch.
The fix is to move the two functions to format/parse base64
curve25519 public keys into a new "crypto_format.c" file. I could
have put them in crypto.c, but that's a big file worth splitting
anyway.
Fixes bug 8153; bugfix on 0.2.4.8-alpha where I did the fix for 7869.
Now we can specify to skip bridges that wouldn't be able to answer the
type of dir fetch we're launching.
It's still the responsibility of the rest of the code to prevent us from
launching a given dir fetch if we have no bridges that could handle it.
Now as we move into a future where most bridges can handle microdescs
we will generally find ourselves using them, rather than holding back
just because one of our bridges doesn't use them.
When we first implemented TLS, we assumed in conneciton_handle_write
that a TOR_TLS_WANT_WRITE from flush_buf_tls meant that nothing had
been written. But when we moved our buffers to a ring buffer
implementation back in 0.1.0.5-rc (!), we broke that invariant: it's
possible that some bytes have been written but nothing.
That's bad. It means that if we do a sequence of TLS writes that ends
with a WANTWRITE, we don't notice that we flushed any bytes, and we
don't (I think) decrement buckets.
Fixes bug 7708; bugfix on 0.1.0.5-rc
