This commit modifies the behavior of `parse_extended_address` in such a way
that if it fails, it will always return a `BAD_HOSTNAME` value, which is then
used to return the 0xF6 extended error code. This way, in any case that is
not a valid v2 address, we return the 0xF6 error code, which is the expected
behavior.
Signed-off-by: David Goulet <dgoulet@torproject.org>
This reverts commit bf2a399fc0.
Don't set by default the prefer IPv6 feature on client ports because it breaks
the torsocks use case. The SOCKS resolve command is lacking a mechanism to ask
for a specific address family (v4 or v6) thus prioritizing IPv6 when an IPv4
address is asked on the resolve SOCKS interface resulting in a failure.
Tor Browser explicitly set PreferIPv6 so this should not affect the majority
of our users.
Closes#33796
Signed-off-by: David Goulet <dgoulet@torproject.org>
This patch lifts the `tor_tls_cert_matches_key()` tests out of the
OpenSSL specific TLS test suite and moves it into the generic TLS test
suite that is executed for both OpenSSL and NSS.
This patch is largely a code movement, but we had to rewrite parts of
the test to avoid using OpenSSL specific data-types (such as `X509 *`)
and replace it with the generic Tor abstraction type
(`tor_x509_cert_impl_t *`).
This patch is part of the fix for TROVE-2020-001.
See: https://bugs.torproject.org/33119
Add an inline helper function that indicates if the cached object contains a
decrypted descriptor or not.
The descriptor object is NULL if tor is unable to decrypt it (lacking client
authorization) and some actions need to be done only when we have a decrypted
object.
This improves code semantic.
Fixes#33458
Signed-off-by: David Goulet <dgoulet@torproject.org>
GCC added an implicit-fallthrough warning a while back, where it
would complain if you had a nontrivial "case:" block that didn't end
with break, return, or something like that. Clang recently added
the same thing.
GCC, however, would let you annotate a fall-through as intended by
any of various magic "/* fall through */" comments. Clang, however,
only seems to like "__attribute__((fallthrough))". Fortunately, GCC
accepts that too.
A previous commit in this branch defined a FALLTHROUGH macro to do
the right thing if GNUC is defined; here we replace all of our "fall
through" comments with uses of that macro.
This is an automated commit, made with the following perl one-liner:
#!/usr/bin/perl -i -p
s#/\* *falls? ?thr.*?\*/#FALLTHROUGH;#i;
(In order to avoid conflicts, I'm applying this script separately to
each maint branch. This is the 0.4.3 version.)
GCC added an implicit-fallthrough warning a while back, where it
would complain if you had a nontrivial "case:" block that didn't end
with break, return, or something like that. Clang recently added
the same thing.
GCC, however, would let you annotate a fall-through as intended by
any of various magic "/* fall through */" comments. Clang, however,
only seems to like "__attribute__((fallthrough))". Fortunately, GCC
accepts that too.
A previous commit in this branch defined a FALLTHROUGH macro to do
the right thing if GNUC is defined; here we replace all of our "fall
through" comments with uses of that macro.
This is an automated commit, made with the following perl one-liner:
#!/usr/bin/perl -i -p
s#/\* *falls? ?thr.*?\*/#FALLTHROUGH;#i;
(In order to avoid conflicts, I'm applying this script separately to
each maint branch. This is the 0.4.2 version.)
GCC added an implicit-fallthrough warning a while back, where it
would complain if you had a nontrivial "case:" block that didn't end
with break, return, or something like that. Clang recently added
the same thing.
GCC, however, would let you annotate a fall-through as intended by
any of various magic "/* fall through */" comments. Clang, however,
only seems to like "__attribute__((fallthrough))". Fortunately, GCC
accepts that too.
A previous commit in this branch defined a FALLTHROUGH macro to do
the right thing if GNUC is defined; here we replace all of our "fall
through" comments with uses of that macro.
This is an automated commit, made with the following perl one-liner:
#!/usr/bin/perl -i -p
s#/\* *falls? ?thr.*?\*/#FALLTHROUGH;#i;
Move a series of function from config.c into that new file which is related to
address resolving.
Part of #33789
Signed-off-by: David Goulet <dgoulet@torproject.org>
This commit moves router_pick_published_address() and the related helper
functions into the new file.
The log_addr_has_changed() function has been made public in router.h so we can
use it in relay_resolve_addr.c.
This is a refactoring as part of Sponsor 55. Only code movement at this
commit.
Part of #33789
Signed-off-by: David Goulet <dgoulet@torproject.org>
Split "can extend over IPv6" and "has advertised IPv6 ORPort" into
separate functions. They currently have the same result, but this may
change in 33818 with ExtendAllowIPv6Addresses.
Part of 33817.
Some tests use IF_BUG_ONCE(), which is fatal when ALL_BUGS_ARE_FATAL,
after the fixes in 33917.
Also run "make autostyle" on these changes.
Part of 33817.
Allow extend cells with IPv6-only link specifiers.
Warn and fail if both IPv4 and IPv6 are invalid.
Also warn if the IPv4 or IPv6 addresses are unexpectedly internal,
but continue with the valid address.
Part of 33817.
Allow clients and relays to send dual-stack and IPv6-only EXTEND2 cells.
Parse dual-stack and IPv6-only EXTEND2 cells on relays.
Relays do not make connections or extend circuits via IPv6: that's the
next step.
Closes ticket 33901.
The client auth protocol allows attacker-controlled x25519 private keys being
passed around, which allows an attacker to potentially trigger the all-zeroes
assert for client_auth_sk in hs_descriptor.c:decrypt_descriptor_cookie().
We fixed that by making sure that an all-zeroes client auth key will not be
used.
There are no guidelines for validating x25519 private keys, and the assert was
there as a sanity check for code flow issues (we don't want to enter that
function with an unitialized key if client auth is being used). To avoid such
crashes in the future, we also changed the assert to a BUG-and-err.
This change broke torsocks that by default is expecting an IPv4 for hostname
resolution because it can't ask tor for a specific IP version with the SOCKS5
extension.
PreferIPv6 made it that sometimes the IPv6 could be returned to torsocks that
was expecting an IPv4.
Torsocks is probably a very unique case because the runtime flow is that it
hijacks DNS resolution (ex: getaddrinfo()), gets an IP and then sends it back
for the connect() to happen.
The libc has DNS resolution functions that allows the caller to request a
specific INET family but torsocks can't tell tor to resolve the hostname only
to an IPv4 or IPv6 and thus by default fallsback to IPv4.
Reverting this change into 0.4.3.x series but we'll keep it in the 0.4.4.x
series in the hope that we add this SOCKS5 extension to tor for DNS resolution
and then change torsocks to use that.
Fixes#33804
Signed-off-by: David Goulet <dgoulet@torproject.org>
