Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

poc: investigate tor SIGABRT with go-libtor-like code #1073

Closed
wants to merge 4 commits into from

Conversation

bassosimone
Copy link
Contributor

I want to understand why we did not see this error previously. My
initial hypothesis is that the code at ooni/go-libtor behaved behaved
differently than #1052.

To understand whether this is the case, in this patch I have copied
the code at libtor/libtor.go and adapted it such that we can use
it inside the current tree.

Part of ooni/probe#2405.
It turns out previously we were not using the control conn. Using
such a conn is not the default and needs to be configured.

However, the code at #1052
tries to be immutable and hence has a different algorithm than the
one inside go-libtor. In particular, this new code always creates
a control connection and then closes it. So, definitely the new
code I wrote is such that it triggers the tor issue.

On the other end, to hope to see the issue with go-libtor we must
enable using the control conn. Let us do that and see.

Part of ooni/probe#2405.
To observe any unexpected behavior using go-libtor-like code, we
need to stop fixing the issue inside of tor itself.

Let us instead replace such a patch with the testing patch adding
useful debugging statements while tor is running.

Part of ooni/probe#2405.
It seems this diff is not necessary to see the real bug, but it
still seems correct to test with better code

Part of ooni/probe#2405
@bassosimone
Copy link
Contributor Author

We're not merging this PR. It has only been useful to pin the commits discussed at ooni/probe#2405 (comment).

@bassosimone bassosimone closed this Feb 3, 2023
@bassosimone bassosimone deleted the golibtorlike branch February 3, 2023 16:13
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant