I got confused when I saw my Tor saying it was opening a file
that doesn't exist. It turns out it isn't opening it, it's just
calling open() on it and then moving on when it's not there.
This includes:
* making bridge_info_t exposed but opaque
* allowing guards where we don't know an identity
* making it possible to learn the identity of a guard
* creating a guard that lacks a node_t
* remembering a guard's address and port.
* Looking up a guard by address and port.
* Only enforcing the rule that we need a live consensus to update
the "listed" status for guards when we are not using bridges.
It's not okay to use the same varargs list twice, and apparently
some windows build environments produce code here that would leave
tor_asprintf() broken. Fix for bug 20560; bugfix on 0.2.2.11-alpha
when tor_asprintf() was introduced.
(OpenSSL 1.1 makes EVP_CIPHER_CTX opaque, _and_ adds acceleration
for counter mode on more architectures. So it won't work if we try
the older approach, and it might help if we try the newer one.)
Fixes bug 20588.
In our code to write public keys to a string, for some unfathomable
reason since 253f0f160e, we would allocate a memory BIO, then
set the NOCLOSE flag on it, extract its memory buffer, and free it.
Then a little while later we'd free the memory buffer with
BUF_MEM_free().
As of openssl 1.1 this doesn't work any more, since there is now a
BIO_BUF_MEM structure that wraps the BUF_MEM structure. This
BIO_BUF_MEM doesn't get freed in our code.
So, we had a memory leak!
Is this an openssl bug? Maybe. But our code was already pretty
silly. Why mess around with the NOCLOSE flag here when we can just
keep the BIO object around until we don't need the buffer any more?
Fixes bug 20553; bugfix on 0.0.2pre8
This function is allowed to return NULL if the certified key isn't
RSA. But in a couple of places we were treating this as a bug or
internal error, and in one other place we weren't checking for it at
all!
Caught by Isis during code review for #15055. The serious bug was
only on the 15055 branch, thank goodness.
All supported Tors (0.2.4+) require versions of openssl that can
handle this.
Now that our link certificates are RSA2048, this might actually help
vs fingerprinting a little.
