We use a pretty specific pair of autoconf tests here to make sure
that we only add this code when:
a) a 64-bit signed multiply fails to link,
AND
b) the same 64-bit signed multiply DOES link correctly when
__mulodi4 is defined.
Closes ticket 19079.
We need to define this function when compiling with clang -m32 -ftrapv,
since otherwise we get link errors, since apparently some versions
of libclang_rt.builtins don't define a version of it that works? Or
clang doesn't know to look for it?
This definition is taken from the LLVM source at
https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/compiler-rt/trunk/lib/builtins/mulodi4.c
I've also included the license (dual BSD-ish/MIT-ish).
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.
This API change makes it so that routerinfo_incompatible...() no
longer takes a routerinfo_t, so that it's obvious that it should
only look at fields from the signed_descriptor_t.
This change should prevent a recurrence of #17150.
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.
The routerinfo we pass to routerinfo_incompatible_with_extrainfo is
the latest routerinfo for the relay. The signed_descriptor_t, on
the other hand, is the signed_descriptor_t that corresponds to the
extrainfo. That means we should be checking the digest256 match
with that signed_descriptor_t, not with the routerinfo.
Fixes bug 17150 (and 19017); bugfix on 0.2.7.2-alpha.
When parsing detached signature, we make sure that we use the length of the
digest algorithm instead of an hardcoded DIGEST256_LEN in order to avoid
comparing bytes out of bound with a smaller digest length such as SHA1.
Fixes#19066
Signed-off-by: David Goulet <dgoulet@torproject.org>
Previously we'd only check whether the hardening options succeeded
at the compile step. Now we'll try to link with them too, and tell
the user in advance if something seems likely to go wrong.
Closes ticket 18895.
