Using strncpy meant that if listenaddress were ever >=
sizeof(sockaddr_un.sun_path), we would fail to nul-terminate
sun_path. This isn't a big deal: we never read sun_path, and the
kernel is smart enough to reject the sockaddr_un if it isn't
nul-terminated. Nonetheless, it's a dumb failure mode. Instead, we
should reject addresses that don't fit in sockaddr_un.sun_path.
Coverity found this; it's CID 428. Bugfix on 0.2.0.3-alpha.
I'm not one to insist on C's miserly stack limits, but allocating a
256K array on the stack is too much even for me.
Bugfix on 0.2.1.7-alpha. Found by coverity. Fixes CID # 450.
We had all the code in place to handle this right... except that we
were unconditionally opening a PF_INET socket instead of looking at
sa_family. Ow.
Fixes bug 2574; not a bugfix on any particular version, since this
never worked before.
The new behavior is to try to rename the old file if there is one there
that we can't read. In all likelihood, that will fail too, but at least
we tried, and at least it won't crash.
Partial backport of daa0326aaa .
Resolves bug 2402. Bugfix on 0.2.1.15 (for the part where we switched to
git) and on 0.2.1.30 (for the part where we dumped micro-revisions.)
Our regular DH parameters that we use for circuit and rendezvous
crypto are unchanged. This is yet another small step on the path of
protocol fingerprinting resistance.
(Backport from 0.2.2's 5ed73e3807)
When we stopped using svn, 0.2.1.x lost the ability to notice its svn
revision and report it in the version number. However, it kept
looking at the micro-revision.i file... so if you switched to master,
built tor, then switched to 0.2.1.x, you'd get a micro-revision.i file
from master reported as an SVN tag. This patch takes out the "include
the svn tag" logic entirely.
Bugfix on 0.2.1.15-rc; fixes bug 2402.
This patch imposes (very long) limits on the length of a line in a
directory document, and on the length of a certificate. I don't
think it should actually be possible to overrun these remotely,
since we already impose a maximum size on any directory object we're
downloading, but a little defensive programming never hurt anybody.
Roger emailed me that doorss reported these on IRC, but nobody seems
to have put them on the bugtracker.
