These statistics were largely ununsed, and kept track of statistical information
on things like how many time we had done TLS or how many signatures we had
verified. This information is largely not useful, and would only be logged
after receiving a SIGUSR1 signal (but only if the logging severity level was
less than LOG_INFO).
* FIXES#19871.
* REMOVES note_crypto_pk_op(), dump_pk_op(), and pk_op_counts from
src/or/rephist.c.
* REMOVES every external call to these functions.
This should be "impossible" without making a SHA1 collision, but
let's not keep the assumption that SHA1 collisions are super-hard.
This prevents another case related to 21278. There should be no
behavioral change unless -ftrapv is on.
Use the following coccinelle script to change uses of
smartlist_add(sl, tor_strdup(str)) to
smartlist_add_strdup(sl, string) (coccinelle script from nickm
via bug 20048):
@@
expression a;
expression b;
@@
- smartlist_add
+ smartlist_add_strdup
(a,
- tor_strdup(
b
- )
)
(Despite the increased size of the consensus, this should have
approximately zero effect on the compressed consensus size, since
the "proto" line should be completely implied by the "v" line.)
This patch makes us retain the intermediate list of K=V entries for
the duration of computing our vote, and lets us use that list with
a new function in order to look up parameters before the consensus
is published.
We can't actually use this function yet because of #19011: our
existing code to do this doesn't actually work, and we'll need a new
consensus method to start using it.
Closes ticket #19012.
See ticket #19132 for the clang/llvm warning.
Since voting_schedule is a global static struct, it will be initialized
to zero even without explicitly initializing it with {0}.
This is what the C spec says:
If an object that has automatic storage duration is not initialized
explicitly, its value is indeterminate. If an object that has static
storage duration is not initialized explicitly, then:
— if it has pointer type, it is initialized to a null pointer;
— if it has arithmetic type, it is initialized to (positive or unsigned) zero;
— if it is an aggregate, every member is initialized (recursively) according to these rules;
— if it is a union, the first named member is initialized (recursively) according to these rules.
One of the last piece that parses the votes and consensus in order to update
our state and make decision for the SR values.
We need to inform the SR subsystem when we set the current consensus because
this can be called when loaded from file or downloaded from other authorities
or computed.
The voting schedule is used for the SR timings since we are bound to the
voting system.
Signed-off-by: David Goulet <dgoulet@torproject.org>
Signed-off-by: George Kadianakis <desnacked@riseup.net>
This commit adds the commit(s) line in the vote as well as the SR values. It
also has the mechanism to add the majority SRVs in the consensus.
Signed-off-by: George Kadianakis <desnacked@riseup.net>
Signed-off-by: David Goulet <dgoulet@torproject.org>
This commit introduces two new files with their header.
"shared_random.c" contains basic functions to initialize the state and allow
commit decoding for the disk state to be able to parse them from disk.
"shared_random_state.c" contains everything that has to do with the state
for both our memory and disk. Lots of helper functions as well as a
mechanism to query the state in a synchronized way.
Signed-off-by: David Goulet <dgoulet@torproject.org>
Signed-off-by: George Kadianakis <desnacked@riseup.net>
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.
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.
Make directory authorities write the v3-status-votes file out
to disk earlier in the consensus process, so we have the votes
even if we abort the consensus process later on.
Resolves ticket 19036.
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.
Previously, I had left in some debugging code with /*XXX*/ after it,
which nobody noticed. Live and learn! Next time I will use /*XXX
DO NOT COMMIT*/ or something.
We need to define a new consensus method for this; consensus method
21 shouldn't actually be used.
Fixes bug 17702; bugfix on 0.2.7.2-alpha.
