#20761: Tor Browser 6.5a4 is ignoring additional SocksPorts
---------------------------------------+-----------------------------------
 Reporter:  gk                         |          Owner:  brade
     Type:  defect                     |         Status:  needs_information
 Priority:  Medium                     |      Milestone:
Component:  Applications/Tor Launcher  |        Version:
 Severity:  Normal                     |     Resolution:
 Keywords:  TorBrowserTeam201612       |  Actual Points:
Parent ID:                             |         Points:
 Reviewer:                             |        Sponsor:
---------------------------------------+-----------------------------------
Changes (by mcs):

 * keywords:  TorBrowserTeam201611 => TorBrowserTeam201612
 * cc: arthuredelstein (added)
 * status:  new => needs_information


Comment:

 Kathy and I are not sure how best to fix this bug. We cannot insist that
 all ports be configured via torrc-defaults because the path for the Unix
 domain sockets is not known until runtime (users can install their browser
 anywhere).

 On the other hand, if we change Tor Launcher to always '''add''' a
 SocksPort (by changing Tor Launcher to pass `+SocksPort ...` on the tor
 command line) then we will run into two problems: (1) another SocksPort
 will be added each time the browser is started and (2) when the user
 toggles `extensions.torlauncher.socks_port_use_ipc` the previous SocksPort
 set by Tor Launcher will not be removed.

 One solution would be to add a Boolean preference that causes all tor port
 configuration to be taken from torrc/torrc-defaults (thus restoring the
 Tor Browser 6.0.x behavior). Tor Launcher and Torbutton would still need
 to know how to connect to the ports, so it would be up to the user to
 ensure that the Tor Launcher prefs such as
 `extensions.torlauncher.control_ipc_path` match what they have in their
 torrc. We would have to come up with a good name for the new pref, e.g.,
 `extensions.torlauncher.tor_use_torrc_ports` (suggestions for a less
 confusing name are welcome).

 Another approach would be to add support for some new preferences that
 could be set by users who need additional SOCKS listeners, e.g.,
 `extensions.torlauncher.socks_port_extra.1`,
 `extensions.torlauncher.socks_port_extra.2`, etc.

 Georg and Arthur, which approach do you like best? Or maybe you have a
 better idea?

 Also, do we need to allow users to have more than one ControlPort too? My
 guess is that we do.

--
Ticket URL: <https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/20761#comment:3>
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki <https://trac.torproject.org/>
The Tor Project: anonymity online
_______________________________________________
tor-bugs mailing list
tor-bugs@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs

Reply via email to