[tor-bugs] #3629 [arm]: Arm/Tor Deb Torrc Configuration

Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki torproject-admin at torproject.org
Fri Jul 22 15:11:42 UTC 2011


#3629: Arm/Tor Deb Torrc Configuration
-------------------------+--------------------------------------------------
 Reporter:  atagar       |          Owner:  ioerror
     Type:  enhancement  |         Status:  new    
 Priority:  normal       |      Milestone:         
Component:  arm          |        Version:         
 Keywords:               |         Parent:         
   Points:               |   Actualpoints:         
-------------------------+--------------------------------------------------

Comment(by atagar):

 > I was hoping that you would adopt this helper as a thing arm installs on
 more than just Debian.

 Woah, that changes this. Just to make sure I'm understanding this right,
 you want arm's install script to automatically execute gcc on the user's
 system? If so then this is the first I've ever heard of an installer doing
 compilation on an end user system...

 If this was just for Debian then I'd be happy to go with pretty much any
 hack you and Peter wanted, but if this is for arm in general then I'm much
 more concerned. It's a pity the setuid bit is specifically disabled on
 most systems for shell scripts. I'd find that much less objectionable.

 My feeling is this:
 - If Tor decides to have root permissions on its torrc then Tor is clearly
 indicating that they want it to only be hand edited. Personally I think
 this is dumb since it breaks SAVECONF and hurts users, but oh well.
 Controllers (both arm and Vidalia) should treat this torrc as being kinda
 useless and work around it.

 - When I scripted arm's setup wizard I took the same tactic as Vidalia,
 making a torrc in my own data directory for an arm managed Tor instance.
 If fixing the permissions on the system torrc and editing the init.d
 script are both forbidden then the only real option left to controllers is
 to ignore those and make their own.

 - This setuid hack is in effect the same as a chown on the system torrc.
 That in itself I'm fine with (assuming Nick was on board). However, this
 is introducing an extremely ugly song-and-dance for working around Tor's
 permission issue and, in my opinion, end user compilation pushes the hack
 way too far. If we think that this hack is ok then we should just skip the
 overly complicated workaround and issue what's in effect a chown directly.

 All this said, if others in the community really think that this is the
 best route forward then I'll bite the bullet in the name of
 interoperability. Sebastian, Nick: what are your opinions?

 -Damian

 PS. No offense at all intended toward your work, Jake. I'm just finding
 that the more I think about this change the more I'm uncomfortable with
 it.

-- 
Ticket URL: <https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/3629#comment:2>
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki <https://trac.torproject.org/>
The Tor Project: anonymity online


More information about the tor-bugs mailing list