[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
Re: [tor-bugs] #27849 [Core Tor/Tor]: Bootstrapping hangs with 'SocksPort 0'
#27849: Bootstrapping hangs with 'SocksPort 0'
----------------------------------------------+----------------------------
Reporter: pabs | Owner: (none)
Type: defect | Status: new
Priority: Very High | Milestone: Tor:
| 0.3.5.x-final
Component: Core Tor/Tor | Version: Tor:
| 0.3.4.8
Severity: Normal | Resolution:
Keywords: config, regression, backport-034 | Actual Points:
Parent ID: | Points:
Reviewer: | Sponsor:
| Sponsor8-can
----------------------------------------------+----------------------------
Comment (by dgoulet):
Replying to [comment:12 arma]:
> I was going to agree with pabs that the right fix is that roles should
look at Tor's config, and if somebody does an add_onion then Tor's config
changed, so the role changed ("now we're an onion service role").
FYI, in theory, `ADD_ONION` should add the "HS" role to your tor and thus
enable the `hs_service` callback from the mainloop and in turn enable all
other callbacks needed to properly run tor. If an `ADD_ONION` command
failed to bootstrap tor, we have another problem. I'll investigate.
> But then I realized there are controller commands like "resolve" that
expect to be able to use the network. They aren't changing Tor's config or
role, they're just trying to *use* Tor.
Yes, considering the amount of things we can do through the control port,
it gets complicated quickly to select which one can enable things or not.
>
> Also, every role (onion service, relay, client, directory authority,
etc) starts by bootstrapping directory information and launching client
circuits to make sure things are working. So putting that as part of "ALL"
makes a lot of sense.
>
> In fact, I think there's a good argument for having us do "the basics"
as dgoulet called them even when there's no controlport -- first because
there might be some other exception that we didn't think of that will bite
us here again, and second because a person who configures their Tor this
way probably expects it to bootstrap (and also now it'll be closer to
ready for whatever they ask it to do next). If we think it's a stupid
config that nobody should use, we should refuse to start with it, not let
it run but then have it do surprising things.
Agree. I'm currently aiming at considering the ControlPort set to be part
of enabling all basic roles since one can almost do most of the roles
through that port...
--
Ticket URL: <https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/27849#comment:13>
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