Re: [tor-bugs] #16276 [Onionoo]: bug in onionoo's family set detection

["Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki" <blackhole@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

#16276: bug in onionoo's family set detection
-----------------------------+-----------------
     Reporter:  cypherpunks  |      Owner:
         Type:  defect       |     Status:  new
     Priority:  major        |  Milestone:
    Component:  Onionoo      |    Version:
   Resolution:               |   Keywords:
Actual Points:               |  Parent ID:
       Points:               |
-----------------------------+-----------------

Comment (by leeroy):

 > Well, do we need another field like `"ineffective_family"`, if we keep
 both `"family"` and `"effective_family"`?  In theory, if those two arrays
 don't have the same length, there's something wrong, and every entry
 that's missing in `"effective_family"`  is something for the relay
 operator to look into; unless I missed a  case.  I'd rather not want to
 add redundant data but rely on Onionoo  clients to be smart enough to
 display information in a way that's useful  to users.  Onionoo is not
 meant to be used by humans.  What do you  think?

 What about operators with really big families? Suppose effective_family is
 only defined if there is a difference. How are they supposed to make use
 of declared family being length n, and effective family being length n-1?
 That is by definition redundant. So maybe it would be better to just have
 the one key, and only update the family key behavior. An operator would
 then need only to check the length against the expected value which they
 should know from torrc.

--
Ticket URL: <https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/16276#comment:20>
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