[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]

Re: [tor-bugs] #2317 [Tor Client]: Missing sanity checks for cbtnummodes consensus parameter

#2317: Missing sanity checks for cbtnummodes consensus parameter
------------------------+---------------------------------------------------
 Reporter:  Sebastian   |       Owner:                    
     Type:  defect      |      Status:  needs_review      
 Priority:  major       |   Milestone:  Tor: 0.2.2.x-final
Component:  Tor Client  |     Version:                    
 Keywords:              |      Parent:                    
------------------------+---------------------------------------------------

Comment(by nickm):

 Replying to [comment:22 arma]:

 > Currently we use < 0 to declare that we're not using it, with -1 being
 the suggested value of < 0. But what if we want to use -2 later to mean
 something else? The current clients would continue ignoring the feature,
 but new clients would have new behavior.

 IMO, if we want to have something we would do with a new value for this
 parameter, we should do it with a new parameter instead.  There's no real
 reason to have a -2 when a new parameter would be cleaner.

-- 
Ticket URL: <https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/2317#comment:24>
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki <https://trac.torproject.org/>
The Tor Project: anonymity online
_______________________________________________
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs