since all it does is produce false positives
this commit should get merged into 0.2.9 and 0.3.0 *and* 0.3.1, even
though the code in the previous commit is already present in 0.3.1. sorry
for the mess.
[Cherry-picked]
since all it does is produce false positives
this commit should get merged into 0.2.9 and 0.3.0 *and* 0.3.1, even
though the code in the previous commit is already present in 0.3.1. sorry
for the mess.
This commit takes a piece of commit af8cadf3a9 and a piece of commit
46fe353f25, with the goal of making channel_is_client() be based on what
sort of connection handshake the other side used, rather than seeing
whether the other side ever sent a create_fast cell to us.
We had this safeguard around dos_init() but not when the consensus changes
which can modify consensus parameters and possibly enable the DoS mitigation
even if tor wasn't a public relay.
Fixes#25223
Signed-off-by: David Goulet <dgoulet@torproject.org>
Explicitly inform the operator of the rejected relay to set a valid email
address in the ContactInfo field and contact bad-relays@ mailing list.
Fixes#25170
Signed-off-by: David Goulet <dgoulet@torproject.org>
We don't expect this to come up very much, but we may as well make
sure that the value isn't predictable (as we do for the other
addresses) in case the issue ever comes up.
Spotted by teor.
This is to avoid positively identifying Exit relays if tor client connection
comes from them that is reentering the network.
One thing to note is that this is done only in the DoS subsystem but we'll
still add it to the geoip cache as a "client" seen. This is done that way so
to avoid as much as possible changing the current behavior of the geoip client
cache since this is being backported.
Closes#25193
Signed-off-by: David Goulet <dgoulet@torproject.org>
The HT_FOREACH() is insanely heavy on the CPU and this is part of the fast
path so make it return the nice memory size counter we added in
4d812e29b9.
Fixes#25148
Signed-off-by: David Goulet <dgoulet@torproject.org>
Becasue the circuit creation burst and rate can change at runtime it is
possible that between two refill of a bucket, we end up setting the bucket
value to less than there currently is.
Fixes#25128
Signed-off-by: David Goulet <dgoulet@torproject.org>
