This step happens after we make each consensus flavor, and before we
worry about sigs or anything. That way if Tor crashes, or if we fail to
get enough sigs, we still have a chance to know what consensus we wanted
to make.
This validation was only done if DisableNetwork was off because we would use
the global list of transports/bridges and DisableNetwork would not populate
it.
This was a problem for any user using DisableNetwork which includes Tor
Browser and thus leading to the Bug() warning.
Without a more in depth refactoring, we can't do this validation without the
global list.
The previous commit makes it that any connection to a bridge without a
transport won't happen thus we keep the security feature of not connecting to
a bridge without its corresponding transport.
Related to #40106
Signed-off-by: David Goulet <dgoulet@torproject.org>
Don't pick the bridge as the guard or launch descriptor fetch if no transport
is found.
Fixes#40106
Signed-off-by: David Goulet <dgoulet@torproject.org>
This patch limits the number of items in the consensus diff cache to 64
on the Windows platform. Hopefully, this will allow us to investigate a
smarter fix while avoiding the situation reported in tor#24857 where
Windows relay operators report Tor using 100% CPU.
See: tor#24857
When selecting the first advertised port, we always prefer the one with an
explicit address.
Closes#40246
Signed-off-by: David Goulet <dgoulet@torproject.org>
We used to actually discard ORPorts that were the same port and same family
but they could have different address.
Instead, we need to keep all different ORPorts so we can bind a listener on
each of them. We will publish only one of these in our descriptor though.
Related to #40246
Signed-off-by: David Goulet <dgoulet@torproject.org>
This patch removes a call to `tor_assert_nonfatal()` if
`extend_info_from_node()` returns NULL. This is unnecessary as we
already handle the case where `info` is NULL in the next `if (!info) {
... }` block in the code.
See: tor#32666.
This reverts commit d07f17f676.
We don't want to consider an entire routable IPv6 network as sybil if more
than 2 relays happen to be on it. For path selection it is very important but
not for selecting relays in the consensus.
Fixes#40243
We can end up trying to find our address from an authority while we don't have
yet its descriptor.
In this case, don't BUG() and just come back later.
Closes#40231
Signed-off-by: David Goulet <dgoulet@torproject.org>
In case building the descriptor would fail, we could still flag that we did in
fact publish the descriptors leading to no more attempt at publishing it which
in turn makes the relay silent for some hours and not try to rebuild the
descriptor later.
This has been spotted with #40231 because the operator used a localhost
address for the ORPort and "AssumeReachable 1" leading to this code path where
the descriptor failed to build but all conditions to "can I publish" were met.
Related to #40231
Signed-off-by: David Goulet <dgoulet@torproject.org>
This is currently for the dircache module that can not be disabled by itself,
it is only disabled from the relay module.
Thus, we should not print in the configure summary the disable option.
Signed-off-by: David Goulet <dgoulet@torproject.org>
This one should work on GCC _and_ on Clang. The previous version
made Clang happier by not having unreachable "fallthrough"
statements, but made GCC sad because GCC didn't think that the
unconditional failures were really unconditional, and therefore
_wanted_ a FALLTHROUGH.
This patch adds a FALLTHROUGH_UNLESS_ALL_BUGS_ARE_FATAL macro that
seems to please both GCC and Clang in this case: ordinarily it is a
FALLTHROUGH, but when ALL_BUGS_ARE_FATAL is defined, it's an
abort().
Fixes bug 40241 again. Bugfix on earlier fix for 40241, which was
merged into maint-0.3.5 and forward, and released in 0.4.5.3-rc.
Some gcc versions do explode if the order of the linker flags are not correct.
One issue was statically building OpenSSL which would require that "-lssl
-lcrypto" be put _before_ the "-lpthread -ldl" flags.
I have not such problem with GCC 10 but does with GCC 9.
Closes#33624
Signed-off-by: David Goulet <dgoulet@torproject.org>
