what's happening here is that we're fetching certs for obsolete
authorities -- probably legacy signers in this case. but try to
remain general in the log message.
It's natural for the definition of bandwidth_rule_t to be with the functions
that actually care about its values. Unfortunately, this means declaring
bandwidth_rate_rule_to_string() out of sequence. Someday we'll just rename
reasons.c to strings.c, and put it at the end of or.h, and this will all be
better.
1) mingw doesn't have _vscprintf(); mingw instead has a working snprintf.
2) windows compilers that _do_ have a working _vscprintf spell it so; they do
not spell it _vcsprintf().
Works like the --enable-static-openssl/libevent options. Requires
--with-zlib-dir to be set. Note that other dependencies might still
pull in a dynamicly linked zlib, if you don't link them in statically
too.
Our code assumed that any version of OpenSSL before 0.9.8l could not
possibly require SSL_OP_ALLOW_UNSAFE_LEGACY_RENEGOTIATION. This is
so... except that many vendors have backported the flag from later
versions of openssl when they backported the RFC5476 renegotiation
feature.
The new behavior is particularly annoying to detect. Previously,
leaving SSL_OP_ALLOW_UNSAFE_LEGACY_RENEGOTIATION unset meant that
clients would fail to renegotiate. People noticed that one fast!
Now, OpenSSL's RFC5476 support means that clients will happily talk to
any servers there are, but servers won't accept renegotiation requests
from unpatched clients unless SSL_OP_ALLOW_etc is set. More fun:
servers send back a "no renegotiation for you!" error, which unpatched
clients respond to by stalling, and generally producing no useful
error message.
This might not be _the_ cause of bug 1346, but it is quite likely _a_
cause for bug 1346.
Everything that accepted the 'Circ' name handled it wrong, so even now
that we fixed the handling of the parameter, we wouldn't be able to
set it without making all the 0.2.2.7..0.2.2.10 relays act wonky.
This patch makes Tors accept the 'Circuit' name instead, so we can
turn on circuit priorities without confusing the versions that treated
the 'Circ' name as occasion to act weird.
I'm adding this because I can never remember what stuff like 'rule 3'
means. That's the one where if somebody goes limp or taps out, the
fight is over, right?
When you mean (a=b(c,d)) >= 0, you had better not say (a=b(c,d)>=0).
We did the latter, and so whenever CircPriorityHalflife was in the
consensus, it was treated as having a value of 1 msec (that is,
boolean true).
We need to make sure we have an event_base in dns.c before we call
anything that wants one. Make sure we always have one in dns_reset()
when we're a client. Fixes bug 1341.
Now if you're a published relay and you set RefuseUnknownExits, even
if your dirport is off, you'll fetch dir info from the authorities,
fetch it early, and cache it.
In the future, RefuseUnknownExits (or something like it) will be on
by default.
From http://archives.seul.org/tor/relays/Mar-2010/msg00006.html :
As I understand it, the bug should show up on relays that don't set
Address to an IP address (so they need to resolve their Address
line or their hostname to guess their IP address), and their
hostname or Address line fails to resolve -- at that point they'll
pick a random 4 bytes out of memory and call that their address. At
the same time, relays that *do* successfully resolve their address
will ignore the result, and only come up with a useful address if
their interface address happens to be a public IP address.
