tor-commits April 2011

tor-commits@lists.torproject.org

18 participants
883 discussions

[tor/release-0.2.2] Merge remote-tracking branch 'arma/bug1090-part1-squashed' into bug1090-part1-squashed
by arma＠torproject.org 27 Apr '11

27 Apr '11

commit 99621bc5a629a81a5a823ce21ac3d967443d0e12 Merge: 8f6cb93 0c40dda Author: Nick Mathewson <nickm(a)torproject.org> Date: Wed Apr 27 13:45:28 2011 -0400 Merge remote-tracking branch 'arma/bug1090-part1-squashed' into bug1090-part1-squashed src/or/rendclient.c | 3 ++- 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

1 0

[tor/release-0.2.2] Add a big changelog entry for bug 1090 fixes
by arma＠torproject.org 27 Apr '11

27 Apr '11

commit c49f660c1a9f196c8cbb4863bb377bdb6e642539 Author: Nick Mathewson <nickm(a)torproject.org> Date: Wed Apr 27 13:33:38 2011 -0400 Add a big changelog entry for bug 1090 fixes --- changes/bug1090-general | 73 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 files changed, 73 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) diff --git a/changes/bug1090-general b/changes/bug1090-general new file mode 100644 index 0000000..4656315 --- /dev/null +++ b/changes/bug1090-general @@ -0,0 +1,73 @@ + o Major features and bugfixes (node selection) + + - Revise and unify the meaning of the ExitNodes, EntryNodes, + ExcludeEntryNodes, ExcludeExitNodes, ExcludeNodes, and + StrictNodes options. Previously, we had been ambiguous in + describing what counted as an "exit" node, and what operations + exactly "StrictNodes 0" would permit. This created confusion + when people saw nodes built through unexpected circuits, and + made it hard to tell real bugs from surprises. We now stipulate + that the intended behavior is: + + . "Exit", in the context of ExitNodes and ExcludeExitNodes, + means a node that delivers user traffic outside the Tor + network. + . "Entry", in the context of EntryNodes and ExcludeEntryNodes, + means a node used as the first hop of a multihop circuit: + it doesn't include direct connections to directory servers. + . "ExcludeNodes" applies to all nodes. + . "StrictNodes" changes the behavior of ExcludeNodes only. + When StrictNodes is set, Tor should avoid all nodes listed + in ExcludeNodes, even when it will make user requests + fail. When StrictNodes is *not* set, then Tor should + follow ExcludeNodes whenever it can, except when it must + use an excluded node to perform self-tests, connect to a + hidden service, provide a hidden service, fulfill a .exit + request, upload directory information, or fetch directory + information. + + Collectively, the changes to implement the behavior are a fix for + bug 1090. + + - ExcludeNodes now takes precedence over EntryNodes and ExitNodes: + if a node is listed in both, it's treated as excluded. + + - ExcludeNodes now applies to directory nodes: as a preference if + StrictNodes is 0, or an absolute requirement if StrictNodes is 1. + (Don't exclude all the directory authorities and set StrictNodes + to 1 unless you really want your Tor to break.) + + - ExcludeNodes and ExcludeExitNodes now override exit enclaving. + + - ExcludeExitNodes now overrides .exit requests. + + - We don't use bridges from ExcludeNodes. + + - When StrictNodes is 1: + . We now apply ExcludeNodes to hidden service introduction points + and to rendezvous points selected by hidden service users. + This can make your hidden service less reliable: use it with + caution! + . If we have used ExcludeNodes on ourself, do not try self-tests. + . If we have excluded all the directory authorities, we will + not even try to upload our descriptor if we're a server. + . Do not honor .exit requests to an excluded node. + + - Remove a misfeature that caused us to ignore the Fast/Stable flags + if ExitNodes was set. Bugfix on 0.2.2.7-alpha. + + - When the set of permitted nodes changes, we now remove any + mappings introduced via TrackExitHosts to now-excluded nodes. + Bugfix on 0.1.0.1-rc. + + - We never cannibalize a circuit that had excluded nodes on it, + even if StrictNodes is 0. Bugfix on 0.1.0.1-rc. + + - Improve log messages related to excluded nodes. + + - Revert a change where we would be laxer about attaching streams to + circuits than when building the circuits. This was meant to + prevent a set of bugs where streams were never attachable, but our + improved code here should make this unnecessary. Bugfix on + 0.2.2.7-alpha. +

1 0

[tor/release-0.2.2] explain an argument in a function comment
by arma＠torproject.org 27 Apr '11

27 Apr '11

commit 0c40dda3ad824d8a782dafae4c4233a949837df3 Author: Roger Dingledine <arma(a)torproject.org> Date: Wed Apr 27 13:43:11 2011 -0400 explain an argument in a function comment --- src/or/rendclient.c | 3 ++- 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/or/rendclient.c b/src/or/rendclient.c index d444611..65e632f 100644 --- a/src/or/rendclient.c +++ b/src/or/rendclient.c @@ -764,7 +764,8 @@ rend_client_get_random_intro(const rend_data_t *rend_query) } /** As rend_client_get_random_intro, except assume that StrictNodes is set - * iff strict is true. + * iff strict is true. If warnings is false, don't complain + * to the user when we're out of nodes, even if StrictNodes is true. */ static extend_info_t * rend_client_get_random_intro_impl(const rend_cache_entry_t *entry,

1 0

[tor/release-0.2.2] Instead of checking whether we have unremoved intro points, check for usable ones
by arma＠torproject.org 27 Apr '11

27 Apr '11

commit 748350ace11fa55758fb8bafe5e5556867dd9c23 Author: Nick Mathewson <nickm(a)torproject.org> Date: Wed Apr 20 16:49:41 2011 -0400 Instead of checking whether we have unremoved intro points, check for usable ones --- src/or/rendclient.c | 44 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------- src/or/rendclient.h | 1 + src/or/rendcommon.c | 2 +- 3 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/or/rendclient.c b/src/or/rendclient.c index 90304c3..d444611 100644 --- a/src/or/rendclient.c +++ b/src/or/rendclient.c @@ -23,7 +23,8 @@ #include "routerlist.h" static extend_info_t *rend_client_get_random_intro_impl( - const rend_data_t *rend_query, const int strict); + const rend_cache_entry_t *rend_query, + const int strict, const int warnings); /** Called when we've established a circuit to an introduction point: * send the introduction request. */ @@ -562,7 +563,7 @@ rend_client_remove_intro_point(extend_info_t *failed_intro, } } - if (smartlist_len(ent->parsed->intro_nodes) == 0) { + if (! rend_client_any_intro_points_usable(ent)) { log_info(LD_REND, "No more intro points remain for %s. Re-fetching descriptor.", escaped_safe_str_client(rend_query->onion_address)); @@ -708,7 +709,7 @@ rend_client_desc_trynow(const char *query) assert_connection_ok(TO_CONN(conn), now); if (rend_cache_lookup_entry(conn->rend_data->onion_address, -1, &entry) == 1 && - smartlist_len(entry->parsed->intro_nodes) > 0) { + rend_client_any_intro_points_usable(entry)) { /* either this fetch worked, or it failed but there was a * valid entry from before which we should reuse */ log_info(LD_REND,"Rend desc is usable. Launching circuits."); @@ -743,13 +744,22 @@ extend_info_t * rend_client_get_random_intro(const rend_data_t *rend_query) { extend_info_t *result; + rend_cache_entry_t *entry; + + if (rend_cache_lookup_entry(rend_query->onion_address, -1, &entry) < 1) { + log_warn(LD_REND, + "Query '%s' didn't have valid rend desc in cache. Failing.", + safe_str_client(rend_query->onion_address)); + return NULL; + } + /* See if we can get a node that complies with ExcludeNodes */ - if ((result = rend_client_get_random_intro_impl(rend_query, 1))) + if ((result = rend_client_get_random_intro_impl(entry, 1, 1))) return result; /* If not, and StrictNodes is not set, see if we can return any old node */ if (!get_options()->StrictNodes) - return rend_client_get_random_intro_impl(rend_query, 0); + return rend_client_get_random_intro_impl(entry, 0, 1); return NULL; } @@ -757,23 +767,18 @@ rend_client_get_random_intro(const rend_data_t *rend_query) * iff strict is true. */ static extend_info_t * -rend_client_get_random_intro_impl(const rend_data_t *rend_query, - const int strict) +rend_client_get_random_intro_impl(const rend_cache_entry_t *entry, + const int strict, + const int warnings) { int i; - rend_cache_entry_t *entry; + rend_intro_point_t *intro; routerinfo_t *router; or_options_t *options = get_options(); smartlist_t *usable_nodes; int n_excluded = 0; - if (rend_cache_lookup_entry(rend_query->onion_address, -1, &entry) < 1) { - log_warn(LD_REND, - "Query '%s' didn't have valid rend desc in cache. Failing.", - safe_str_client(rend_query->onion_address)); - return NULL; - } /* We'll keep a separate list of the usable nodes. If this becomes empty, * no nodes are usable. */ usable_nodes = smartlist_create(); @@ -781,7 +786,7 @@ rend_client_get_random_intro_impl(const rend_data_t *rend_query, again: if (smartlist_len(usable_nodes) == 0) { - if (n_excluded && get_options()->StrictNodes) { + if (n_excluded && get_options()->StrictNodes && warnings) { /* We only want to warn if StrictNodes is really set. Otherwise * we're just about to retry anyways. */ @@ -822,6 +827,15 @@ rend_client_get_random_intro_impl(const rend_data_t *rend_query, return extend_info_dup(intro->extend_info); } +/** Return true iff any introduction points still listed in entry are + * usable. */ +int +rend_client_any_intro_points_usable(const rend_cache_entry_t *entry) +{ + return rend_client_get_random_intro_impl( + entry, get_options()->StrictNodes, 0) != NULL; +} + /** Client-side authorizations for hidden services; map of onion address to * rend_service_authorization_t*. */ static strmap_t *auth_hid_servs = NULL; diff --git a/src/or/rendclient.h b/src/or/rendclient.h index 56ccde1..3f2e58e 100644 --- a/src/or/rendclient.h +++ b/src/or/rendclient.h @@ -29,6 +29,7 @@ int rend_client_receive_rendezvous(origin_circuit_t *circ, void rend_client_desc_trynow(const char *query); extend_info_t *rend_client_get_random_intro(const rend_data_t *rend_query); +int rend_client_any_intro_points_usable(const rend_cache_entry_t *entry); int rend_client_send_introduction(origin_circuit_t *introcirc, origin_circuit_t *rendcirc); diff --git a/src/or/rendcommon.c b/src/or/rendcommon.c index f4c8888..9d6a89e 100644 --- a/src/or/rendcommon.c +++ b/src/or/rendcommon.c @@ -934,7 +934,7 @@ rend_cache_lookup_entry(const char *query, int version, rend_cache_entry_t **e) tor_assert((*e)->parsed && (*e)->parsed->intro_nodes); /* XXX023 hack for now, to return "not found" if there are no intro * points remaining. See bug 997. */ - if (smartlist_len((*e)->parsed->intro_nodes) == 0) + if (! rend_client_any_intro_points_usable(*e)) return 0; return 1; }

1 0

[tor/release-0.2.2] Merge branch 'bug1090-manpage-squashed' into bug1090-part1-squashed
by arma＠torproject.org 27 Apr '11

27 Apr '11

commit 8f6cb933b6a8ee63f2e208ec43933ad27afa2af0 Merge: c49f660 2ac768e Author: Nick Mathewson <nickm(a)torproject.org> Date: Wed Apr 27 13:44:55 2011 -0400 Merge branch 'bug1090-manpage-squashed' into bug1090-part1-squashed doc/tor.1.txt | 74 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------ 1 files changed, 58 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)

1 0

[tor/release-0.2.2] better user-facing warnings for unexpected last hops
by arma＠torproject.org 27 Apr '11

27 Apr '11

commit b8b557dcb2bf719976858589345f08fffbab13e3 Author: Roger Dingledine <arma(a)torproject.org> Date: Tue Apr 26 22:48:00 2011 -0400 better user-facing warnings for unexpected last hops these still aren't perfect, but we won't know how to correct them until we start experiencing surprised users. --- src/or/circuitbuild.c | 32 ++++++++++++++++++-------------- 1 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/or/circuitbuild.c b/src/or/circuitbuild.c index 6401e71..90572d5 100644 --- a/src/or/circuitbuild.c +++ b/src/or/circuitbuild.c @@ -2878,7 +2878,6 @@ warn_if_last_router_excluded(origin_circuit_t *circ, const extend_info_t *exit) or_options_t *options = get_options(); routerset_t *rs = options->ExcludeNodes; const char *description; - int domain = LD_CIRC; uint8_t purpose = circ->_base.purpose; if (circ->build_state->onehop_tunnel) @@ -2914,7 +2913,6 @@ warn_if_last_router_excluded(origin_circuit_t *circ, const extend_info_t *exit) case CIRCUIT_PURPOSE_C_REND_READY_INTRO_ACKED: case CIRCUIT_PURPOSE_C_REND_JOINED: description = "chosen rendezvous point"; - domain = LD_BUG; break; case CIRCUIT_PURPOSE_CONTROLLER: rs = options->_ExcludeExitNodesUnion; @@ -2924,18 +2922,24 @@ warn_if_last_router_excluded(origin_circuit_t *circ, const extend_info_t *exit) if (routerset_contains_extendinfo(rs, exit)) { /* We should never get here if StrictNodes is set to 1. */ - if (options->StrictNodes) - log_warn(LD_BUG, "Using an excluded node with StrictNodes set. " - "Please report the following log message to the " - "developers."); - log_fn(LOG_WARN, domain, "Using %s '%s' which is listed in " - "ExcludeNodes%s, because no other options were available. To " - "prevent this, set the StrictNodes configuration option." - "(Circuit purpose is %d)", - description,exit->nickname, - rs==options->ExcludeNodes?"":" or ExcludeExitNodes", - (int)purpose); - circuit_log_path(LOG_WARN, domain, circ); + if (options->StrictNodes) { + log_warn(LD_BUG, "Using %s '%s' which is listed in ExcludeNodes%s, " + "even though StrictNodes is set. Please report. " + "(Circuit purpose: %s)", + description, exit->nickname, + rs==options->ExcludeNodes?"":" or ExcludeExitNodes", + circuit_purpose_to_string(purpose)); + } else { + log_warn(LD_CIRC, "Using %s '%s' which is listed in " + "ExcludeNodes%s, because no better options were available. To " + "prevent this (and possibly break your Tor functionality), " + "set the StrictNodes configuration option. " + "(Circuit purpose: %s)", + description, exit->nickname, + rs==options->ExcludeNodes?"":" or ExcludeExitNodes", + circuit_purpose_to_string(purpose)); + } + circuit_log_path(LOG_WARN, LD_CIRC, circ); } return;

1 0

[tor/release-0.2.2] warn if we launch too many circuits for a given stream
by arma＠torproject.org 27 Apr '11

27 Apr '11

commit f7a5bc16d689e8b919285c66cd0f07a6694bcc69 Author: Roger Dingledine <arma(a)torproject.org> Date: Tue Apr 26 22:18:01 2011 -0400 warn if we launch too many circuits for a given stream --- changes/bug1090-launch-warning | 5 +++++ src/or/circuituse.c | 13 ++++++++++++- src/or/or.h | 7 +++++++ 3 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) diff --git a/changes/bug1090-launch-warning b/changes/bug1090-launch-warning new file mode 100644 index 0000000..3f3fbcb --- /dev/null +++ b/changes/bug1090-launch-warning @@ -0,0 +1,5 @@ + o Minor features: + - Keep track of how many times we launch a new circuit to handle + a given stream. Too many launches could indicate an inconsistency + between our "launch a circuit to handle this stream" logic and our + "attach our stream to one of the available circuits" logic. diff --git a/src/or/circuituse.c b/src/or/circuituse.c index cc4a739..fd1cf6b 100644 --- a/src/or/circuituse.c +++ b/src/or/circuituse.c @@ -1409,7 +1409,18 @@ circuit_get_open_circ_or_launch(edge_connection_t *conn, extend_info_free(extend_info); - if (desired_circuit_purpose != CIRCUIT_PURPOSE_C_GENERAL) { + if (desired_circuit_purpose == CIRCUIT_PURPOSE_C_GENERAL) { + /* We just caused a circuit to get built because of this stream. + * If this stream has caused a _lot_ of circuits to be built, that's + * a bad sign: we should tell the user. */ + if (conn->num_circuits_launched < NUM_CIRCUITS_LAUNCHED_THRESHOLD && + ++conn->num_circuits_launched == NUM_CIRCUITS_LAUNCHED_THRESHOLD) + log_warn(LD_BUG, "The application request to %s:%d has launched " + "%d circuits without finding one it likes.", + escaped_safe_str_client(conn->socks_request->address), + conn->socks_request->port, + conn->num_circuits_launched); + } else { /* help predict this next time */ rep_hist_note_used_internal(time(NULL), need_uptime, 1); if (circ) { diff --git a/src/or/or.h b/src/or/or.h index 50a1223..7d354c8 100644 --- a/src/or/or.h +++ b/src/or/or.h @@ -1151,6 +1151,13 @@ typedef struct edge_connection_t { * already retried several times. */ uint8_t num_socks_retries; +#define NUM_CIRCUITS_LAUNCHED_THRESHOLD 10 + /** Number of times we've launched a circuit to handle this stream. If + * it gets too high, that could indicate an inconsistency between our + * "launch a circuit to handle this stream" logic and our "attach our + * stream to one of the available circuits" logic. */ + unsigned int num_circuits_launched:4; + /** True iff this connection is for a DNS request only. */ unsigned int is_dns_request:1;

1 0

[tor/release-0.2.2] Revise the manpage to contain the actual intended *Nodes behavior
by arma＠torproject.org 27 Apr '11

27 Apr '11

commit 2ac768e89f16230d9af1ea5dd84856568d4ceeef Author: Nick Mathewson <nickm(a)torproject.org> Date: Thu Mar 10 18:25:51 2011 -0500 Revise the manpage to contain the actual intended *Nodes behavior This is a squashed version of my former desired_nodes_behavior branch that we used to specify the intended results wrt bug 1090. --- doc/tor.1.txt | 74 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------ 1 files changed, 58 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-) diff --git a/doc/tor.1.txt b/doc/tor.1.txt index f1734d2..866a702 100644 --- a/doc/tor.1.txt +++ b/doc/tor.1.txt @@ -489,32 +489,74 @@ The following options are useful only for clients (that is, if **ExcludeNodes** __node__,__node__,__...__:: A list of identity fingerprints, nicknames, country codes and address - patterns of nodes to never use when building a circuit. (Example: - ExcludeNodes SlowServer, $ EFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF, \{cc}, 255.254.0.0/8) + patterns of nodes to avoid when building a circuit. + (Example: + ExcludeNodes SlowServer, $ EFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF, \{cc}, 255.254.0.0/8) + ++ + By default, this option is treated as a preference that Tor is allowed + to override in order to keep working. + For example, if you try to connect to a hidden service, + but you have excluded all of the hidden service's introduction points, + Tor will connect to one of them anyway. If you do not want this + behavior, set the StrictNodes option (documented below). + ++ + Note also that if you are a relay, this (and the other node selection + options below) only affects your own circuits that Tor builds for you. + Clients can still build circuits through you to any node. Controllers + can tell Tor to build circuits through any node. + **ExcludeExitNodes** __node__,__node__,__...__:: A list of identity fingerprints, nicknames, country codes and address - patterns of nodes to never use when picking an exit node. Note that any + patterns of nodes to never use when picking an exit node---that is, a + node that delivers traffic for you outside the Tor network. Note that any node listed in ExcludeNodes is automatically considered to be part of this - list. + list too. See also the caveats on the "ExitNodes" option below -**EntryNodes** __node__,__node__,__...__:: - A list of identity fingerprints, nicknames and address - patterns of nodes to use for the first hop in normal circuits. These are - treated only as preferences unless StrictNodes (see below) is also set. **ExitNodes** __node__,__node__,__...__:: A list of identity fingerprints, nicknames, country codes and address - patterns of nodes to use for the last hop in normal exit circuits. These - are treated only as preferences unless StrictNodes (see below) is also set. + patterns of nodes to use as exit node---that is, a + node that delivers traffic for you outside the Tor network. + ++ + Note that if you list too few nodes here, or if you exclude too many exit + nodes with ExcludeExitNodes, you can degrade functionality. For example, + if none of the exits you list allows traffic on port 80 or 443, you won't + be able to browse the web. + ++ + Note also that not every circuit is used to deliver traffic outside of + the Tor network. It is normal to see non-exit circuits (such as those + used to connect to hidden services, those that do directory fetches, + those used for self-tests, and so on) that end at a non-exit node. To + keep a node from being used entirely, see ExcludeNodes and StrictNodes. + ++ + The ExcludeNodes option overrides this option: any node listed in both + ExitNodes and ExcludeNodes is treated as excluded. + ++ + The .exit address notation, if enabled, overrides this option. + +**EntryNodes** __node__,__node__,__...__:: + A list of identity fingerprints and nicknames of nodes + to use for the first hop in your normal circuits. (Country codes and + address patterns are not yet supported.) This includes all + circuits except for direct connections to directory servers. The Bridge + option overrides this option; if you have configured bridges and + UseBridges is 1, the Bridges are used as your entry nodes. + ++ + The ExcludeNodes option overrides this option: any node listed in both + EntryNodes and ExcludeNodes is treated as excluded. **StrictNodes** **0**|**1**:: - If 1 and EntryNodes config option is set, Tor will never use any nodes - besides those listed in EntryNodes for the first hop of a normal circuit. - If 1 and ExitNodes config option is set, Tor will never use any nodes - besides those listed in ExitNodes for the last hop of a normal exit - circuit. Note that Tor might still use these nodes for non-exit circuits - such as one-hop directory fetches or hidden service support circuits. + If StrictNodes is set to 1, Tor will treat the ExcludeNodes option as a + requirement to follow for all the circuits you generate, even if doing so + will break functionality for you. If StrictNodes is set to 0, Tor will + still try to avoid nodes in the ExcludeNodes list, but it will err on the + side of avoiding unexpected errors. Specifically, StrictNodes 0 tells + Tor that it is okay to use an excluded node when it is *necessary* to + perform self-tests, connect to + a hidden service, provide a hidden service to a client, fulfill a .exit + request, upload directory information, or download directory information. + (Default: 0) **FascistFirewall** **0**|**1**:: If 1, Tor will only create outgoing connections to ORs running on ports

1 0

[tor/release-0.2.2] Explain the "using anyway" log message better
by arma＠torproject.org 27 Apr '11

27 Apr '11

commit 92ec36a061de17dd4e378d5ce34d82f91eee9f86 Author: Sebastian Hahn <sebastian(a)torproject.org> Date: Fri Apr 8 04:01:23 2011 +0200 Explain the "using anyway" log message better Also add a request to report any cases where we are not honoring StrictNodes to the developers: These should now all be bugs. --- src/or/circuitbuild.c | 18 ++++++++++++------ 1 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/or/circuitbuild.c b/src/or/circuitbuild.c index c58509f..681f524 100644 --- a/src/or/circuitbuild.c +++ b/src/or/circuitbuild.c @@ -2896,7 +2896,7 @@ warn_if_last_router_excluded(origin_circuit_t *circ, const extend_info_t *exit) case CIRCUIT_PURPOSE_C_GENERAL: if (circ->build_state->is_internal) return; - description = "Requested exit node"; + description = "requested exit node"; rs = options->_ExcludeExitNodesUnion; break; case CIRCUIT_PURPOSE_C_INTRODUCING: @@ -2911,22 +2911,28 @@ warn_if_last_router_excluded(origin_circuit_t *circ, const extend_info_t *exit) case CIRCUIT_PURPOSE_C_REND_READY: case CIRCUIT_PURPOSE_C_REND_READY_INTRO_ACKED: case CIRCUIT_PURPOSE_C_REND_JOINED: - description = "Chosen rendezvous point"; + description = "chosen rendezvous point"; domain = LD_BUG; break; case CIRCUIT_PURPOSE_CONTROLLER: rs = options->_ExcludeExitNodesUnion; - description = "Controller-selected circuit target"; + description = "controller-selected circuit target"; break; } if (routerset_contains_extendinfo(rs, exit)) { - log_fn(LOG_WARN, domain, "%s '%s' is in ExcludeNodes%s. Using anyway " - "(circuit purpose %d).", + /* We should never get here if StrictNodes is set to 1. */ + if (options->StrictNodes) + log_warn(LD_BUG, "Using an excluded node with StrictNodes set. " + "Please report the following log message to the " + "developers."); + log_fn(LOG_WARN, domain, "Using %s '%s' which is listed in " + "ExcludeNodes%s, because no other options were available. To " + "prevent this, set the StrictNodes configuration option." + "(Circuit purpose is %d)", description,exit->nickname, rs==options->ExcludeNodes?"":" or ExcludeExitNodes", (int)purpose); - /* XXX022-1090 "using anyway" is freaking people out -RD */ circuit_log_path(LOG_WARN, domain, circ); }

1 0

[tor/release-0.2.2] Check transition of circuit purpose from INTRO->GENERAL if nodes are constrained
by arma＠torproject.org 27 Apr '11

27 Apr '11

commit 79a3b3cd3719b3b87b0edbab62b256e42c7b42de Author: Nick Mathewson <nickm(a)torproject.org> Date: Sun Apr 3 20:06:31 2011 -0400 Check transition of circuit purpose from INTRO->GENERAL if nodes are constrained This looked at first like another fun way around our node selection logic: if we had introduction circuits, and we wound up building too many, we would turn extras into general-purpose circuits. But when we did so, we wouldn't necessarily check whether the general-purpose circuits conformed to our node constraints. For example, the last node could totally be in ExcludedExitNodes and we wouldn't have cared... ...except that the circuit should already be internal, so it won't get user streams attached to it, so the transition should generally be allowed. Add an assert to make sure we're right about this, and have it not check whether ExitNodes is set, since that's irrelevant to internal circuits. --- src/or/rendservice.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++++---------- 1 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/or/rendservice.c b/src/or/rendservice.c index 5b85394..cd8f9ea 100644 --- a/src/or/rendservice.c +++ b/src/or/rendservice.c @@ -1347,17 +1347,26 @@ rend_service_intro_has_opened(origin_circuit_t *circuit) } /* If we already have enough introduction circuits for this service, - * redefine this one as a general circuit. */ + * redefine this one as a general circuit or close it, depending. */ if (count_established_intro_points(serviceid) > NUM_INTRO_POINTS) { - log_info(LD_CIRC|LD_REND, "We have just finished an introduction " - "circuit, but we already have enough. Redefining purpose to " - "general."); - /* XXX022-1090: This can wind up violating ExcludeNodes/ - * ExitNodes/ExcludeExitNodes restrictions. - */ - TO_CIRCUIT(circuit)->purpose = CIRCUIT_PURPOSE_C_GENERAL; - circuit_has_opened(circuit); - return; + or_options_t *options = get_options(); + if (options->ExcludeNodes) { + /* XXXX in some future version, we can test whether the transition is + allowed or not given the actual nodes in the circuit. But for now, + this case, we might as well close the thing. */ + log_info(LD_CIRC|LD_REND, "We have just finished an introduction " + "circuit, but we already have enough. Closing it."); + circuit_mark_for_close(TO_CIRCUIT(circuit), END_CIRC_REASON_NONE); + return; + } else { + tor_assert(circuit->build_state->is_internal); + log_info(LD_CIRC|LD_REND, "We have just finished an introduction " + "circuit, but we already have enough. Redefining purpose to " + "general; leaving as internal."); + TO_CIRCUIT(circuit)->purpose = CIRCUIT_PURPOSE_C_GENERAL; + circuit_has_opened(circuit); + return; + } } log_info(LD_REND,

1 0

← Newer
1
...
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
...
89
Older →

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

tor-commits April 2011