| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
| ... | |
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
Run rustfmt. Separate commit to make review of the substantive commit
easier.
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
This is a *lot* of unwraps. The function takes no parameters and
is used only for testing. It ought to be infallible.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
This only affects uses of thread_rng(), and affects them all more or
less indiscriminately. One test does not work with
ARTI_TEST_PRNG=deterministic; the next commit will fix it.
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Although these do not appear in the config, it does have a builder.
It seems sensible to get rid of this ad-hoc list manipulation site,
and replace it with our standard list builder API.
define_list_builder_helper requires that the builder element type be
Deserialize. Currently GuardUsageRestriction is a transparent, public
enum, so we aren't really exposing anything.
We could introduce GuardUsageRestrictionBuilder now, but
since it's not in the config and thereofore only in the public API of
the lower crates, we can definitely put that off.
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
Remove all `use` statements for `TryFrom` and `TryInto`. These are
now redundant in Rust 2021.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
If we're building a path with the guard manager involved, we now ask
the guard manager to pick our first hop no matter what. We only
pick from the fallback list ourselves if we're using the API with no
guard manager.
This causes some follow-on changes where we have to remember an
OwnedChanTarget object in a TorPath we've built, and where we gain
the ability to say we're building a path "from nothing extra at
all." Those are all internal to the crate, though.
Closes #220, by making sure that we use our guards to get a fresh
netdir (if we can) before falling back to any fallbacks, even if our
consensus is old.
Compilation should be fixed in the next commit.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The guard manager is responsible for handing out the first hops of
tor circuits, keeping track of their successes and failures, and
remembering their states. Given that, it makes sense to store this
information here. It is not yet used; I'll be fixing that in
upcoming commits.
Arguably, this information no longer belongs in the directory
manager: I've added a todo about moving it.
This commit will break compilation on its own in a couple of places;
subsequent commits will fix it up.
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
| |
There are a couple of tricky ones I'll do separately.
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| |\
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
Squash, refactor, and test !139 (Don't use same family as exit when picking a guard)
Closes #183
See merge request tpo/core/arti!173
|
| | |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
Just as `in_same_family` is a member of Relay, so the function for
getting all the real family members of a relay should belong in the
same crate.
This change also removes the `family()` accessor: it gives the _claimed_ family rather
than the _acknlowedged_ family, and is therefore a bit dangerous.
There's still a hole in this logic; I've noted it in the Limitations
section. If we get a microdescriptor for a relay in between creating
and using the guard restriction, it might be omitted from the family
list.
|
| | |
| |
| |
| | |
This approach saves us from a linear search when picking guards.
|
| | |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
There's not much reason to use a HashSet here, since we're just
going over the whole list.
This reverts commit 16e8489abbea1581b8e2 and does a little more
refactoring.
|
| | | |
|
| |/
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
We want to only use TODO in the codebase for non-blockers, and open
tickets for anything that is a bigger blocker than a TODO. These
XXXXs seem like definite non-blockers to me.
Part of arti#231.
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
| |
Also fix some commonwealth spellings that had slipped in.
|
| |
|
|
| |
Also use the path_rules name consistently throughout the code.
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
This check relies on families being enforced correctly, which is not
the case when specifying a fixed exit and using guards. (See #183)
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
We must not apply our new path-bias behavior (where we blame a guard
if it gives us too many indeterminate circuit failures) if the path
was not chosen at random. If too many random paths fail, we know
that's suspicious, since the other relays are a random sample. But
if a bunch of user-provided paths fail, that could simply be because
the user's chosen exit is down.
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
| |
There are some limitations here, as noted in the comments.
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
|
|
This will cause some pain for now, but now is really the best time
to do this kind of thing.
|