Re: [tor-relays] Testing Golang relay implementation

Is the bug in my descriptor or the parser?

In testing it took a little bit of finagling to get chutney to accept a non-Tor "platform" item in the descriptor. Turned out adding a "proto" line as well is enough. But it did occur to me that other code may assume the "platform" line takes a certain form.

I can easily change the descriptor if necessary? I've included it below for reference:

---

router pearl000 35.203.138.1 9001 0 0

signing-key

-----BEGIN RSA PUBLIC KEY-----

MIGJAoGBAKzTaN4tZGv1kiQWBzeuOk+ovr2LtIURlaVC38j6j/fQuYfuAZX/XvV1

fQr9EVh+T617dh+frt2D0QDuzLUvP3hpgVozW94w+Ib85pUCne03f4rj3QYu5Qtg

GvzShslZI6vgyy0g2jAOGa4jxT/UYAcKE5dQo8CBKA6Qb0P5Joc1AgMBAAE=

-----END RSA PUBLIC KEY-----

fingerprint 6832 5B4B 1E17 7374 B84D 372F 0304 6351 BEE7 FF6A

onion-key

-----BEGIN RSA PUBLIC KEY-----

MIGJAoGBANN/gLTe05kWKPSEyYJeknuxQst+cVsVmZrZgIYNXuhPn+3XnWhEc10r

ICa82FkB7hBH6REuW0ugGDc2QLwENmDiaBiFW1LDujEFeVlV8o0VSDwrL3VCPsPL

zC4/zHqR4DmLFXp5V238MKj85Pud04g65piZCIAsy6hiGMDCoGdtAgMBAAE=

-----END RSA PUBLIC KEY-----

ntor-onion-key ATSN2Q9KwCeRu35agh/ChjX8MsgM/FGFRDUX6o9Sbmk

platform Pearl 0fd5756 on Linux

contact pearl@xxxxxxxx https://github.com/mmcloughlin/pearl

bandwidth 153600 307200 153600

published 2017-10-25 18:00:28

reject *:*

proto Link=4 LinkAuth=1 Relay=2

router-signature

-----BEGIN SIGNATURE-----

OyY0vQc5n2RYdkrXqfn09HoACJBx7GrBHZMnmNtlX5nJIL9N4eyyPvmxhmuC+A94

dDE0u/6w3nCABikFFLHcKaBAdmYBdxrzk3imfVjzYZazHWWr/se8HxK1jibP186A

8K8bdtMih127CGv3mn+g17uXFTbbuylM7r1xf8NpqRs=

-----END SIGNATURE-----

On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 12:34 PM, D.S. Ljungmark <spider@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

So it's already finding bugs in other implementations?

That's pretty awesome! ;-)

//Spider

On 25/10/17 21:16, nusenu wrote:
> https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/23981#comment:9
> wrote:
>
>> Looks like this issue is caused by a server descriptor produced by an
>> alternate Tor implementation that identifies itself as `"platform Pearl
>> 0fd5756 on Linux"`. And that implementation uses a different order of
>> elements in its descriptor.
>
> :)
>
>
>

> _______________________________________________
> tor-relays mailing list
> tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
>

_______________________________________________
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays