So, back long ago, XXX012 meant, "before Tor 0.1.2 is released, we
had better revisit this comment and fix it!"
But we have a huge pile of such comments accumulated for a large
number of released versions! Not cool.
So, here's what I tried to do:
* 0.2.9 and 0.2.8 are retained, since those are not yet released.
* XXX+ or XXX++ or XXX++++ or whatever means, "This one looks
quite important!"
* The others, after one-by-one examination, are downgraded to
plain old XXX. Which doesn't mean they aren't a problem -- just
that they cannot possibly be a release-blocking problem.
Remove support for "GET /tor/bytes.txt" DirPort request, and
"GETINFO dir-usage" controller request, which were only available
via a compile-time option in Tor anyway.
Feature was added in 0.2.2.1-alpha. Resolves ticket 19035.
With the fix for #17150, I added a duplicate certificate here. Here
I remove the original location in 0.2.8. (I wouldn't want to do
that in 027, due to the amount of authority-voting-related code
drift.)
Closes 19073.
We need this field to be in signed_descriptor_t so that
routerinfo_incompatible_with_extrainfo can work correctly (#17150).
But I don't want to move it completely in this patch, since a great
deal of the code that messes with it has been in flux since 0.2.7,
when this ticket was opened. I should open another ticket about
removing the field from routerinfo_t and extrainfo_t later on.
This patch fixes no actual behavior.
This changes simply renames them by removing "Testing" in front of them and
they do not require TestingTorNetwork to be enabled anymore.
Fixes#18481
Signed-off-by: David Goulet <dgoulet@ev0ke.net>
I had a half-built mechanism to track, during the voting process,
whether the Ed25519 value (or lack thereof) reflected a true
consensus among the authorities. But we never actually inserted this
field in the consensus.
The key idea here is that we first attempt to match up votes by pairs
of <Ed,RSA>, where <Ed> can be NULL if we're told that there is no
Ed key. If this succeeds, then we can treat all those votes as 'a
consensus for Ed'. And we can include all other votes with a
matching RSA key and no statement about Ed keys as being "also about
the same relay."
After that, we look for RSA keys we haven't actually found an entry
for yet, and see if there are enough votes for them, NOT considering
Ed keys. If there are, we match them as before, but we treat them
as "not a consensus about ed".
When we include an entry in a consensus, if it does not reflect a
consensus about ed keys, then we include a new NoEdConsensus flag on
it.
This is all only for consensus method 22 or later.
Also see corresponding dir-spec patch.
When generating a vote, and we have two routerinfos with the same ed
key, omit the one published earlier.
This was supposed to have been solved by key pinning, but when I
made key pinning optional, I didn't realize that this would jump up
and bite us. It is part of bug 18318, and the root cause of 17668.
They are no longer "all" digests, but only the "common" digests.
Part of 17795.
This is an automated patch I made with a couple of perl one-liners:
perl -i -pe 's/crypto_digest_all/crypto_common_digests/g;' src/*/*.[ch]
perl -i -pe 's/\bdigests_t\b/common_digests_t/g;' src/*/*.[ch]
Bridge clients ignore ClientUseIPv6, acting as if it is always 1.
This preserves existing behaviour.
Make ClientPreferIPv6OR/DirPort auto by default:
* Bridge clients prefer IPv6 by default.
* Other clients prefer IPv4 by default.
This preserves existing behaviour.
ClientUseIPv4 0 tells tor to avoid IPv4 client connections.
ClientPreferIPv6DirPort 1 tells tor to prefer IPv6 directory connections.
Refactor policy for IPv4/IPv6 preferences.
Fix a bug where node->ipv6_preferred could become stale if
ClientPreferIPv6ORPort was changed after the consensus was loaded.
Update documentation, existing code, add unit tests.
Avoid using a pronoun where it makes comments unclear.
Avoid using gender for things that don't have it.
Avoid assigning gender to people unnecessarily.
This will give relay operators the ability of disabling the caching of
directory data. In general, this should not be necessary, but on some
lower-resource systems it may beneficial.
When a relay does not have an open directory port but it has an
orport configured and is accepting client connections then it can
now service tunnelled directory requests, too. This was already true
of relays with an dirport configured.
We also conditionally stop advertising this functionality if the
relay is nearing its bandwidth usage limit - same as how dirport
advertisement is determined.
Partial implementation of prop 237, ticket 12538
* The option is now KeepBindCapabilities
* We now warn if the user specifically asked for KeepBindCapabilities
and we can't deliver.
* The unit tests are willing to start.
* Fewer unused-variable warnings.
* More documentation, fewer misspellings.
