| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
Failing on too much data is good, but we can do better by checking for
exact filesizes as we know with hashsums how large a file should be, so
if we get a file which has a size we do not expect we can drop it
directly, regardless of if the file is larger or smaller than what we
expect which should catch most cases which would end up as hashsum
errors later now a lot sooner.
|
|
We tend to operate on rather large static files, which means we usually
get Content-Length information from the server. If we combine this
information with the filesize we are expecting (factoring in pipelining)
we can avoid reading a bunch of data we are ending up rejecting anyhow
by just closing the connection saving bandwidth and time both for the
server as well as the client.
|
|
Some people do not recognize the field value with such an arcane name
and/or expect it to refer to something different (e.g. #839257).
We can't just rename it internally as its an avoidance strategy as such
fieldname existed previously with less clear semantics, but we can spare
the general public from this implementation detail.
|
|
For "Hash Sum mismatch" that info doesn't make a whole lot of
difference, but for the new insufficient info message an indicator that
while this hashes are there and even match, they aren't enough from a
security standpoint.
|
|
They are the small brothers of the hashsum mismatch, so they deserve a
similar treatment even through we have for architectual reasons not a
much to display as for hashsum mismatches for now.
|
|
Users tend to report these errors with just this error message… not very
actionable and hard to figure out if this is a temporary or 'permanent'
mirror-sync issue or even the occasional apt bug.
Showing the involved hashsums and modification times should help in
triaging these kind of bugs – and eventually we will have less of them
via by-hash.
The subheaders aren't marked for translation for now as they are
technical glibberish and probably easier to deal with if not translated.
After all, our iconic "Hash Sum mismatch" is translated at least.
These additions were proposed in #817240 by Peter Palfrader.
|
|
This is a duplicate of sorts of 0efb29eb36184bbe6de7b1013d1898796d94b171
which is the a lot more frequent case of this error – and also a
duplicate of this error message, just without the \n at the end.
Git-Dch: Ignore
|
|
The structure we parse the data into has a dedicated size field, but it
tends to be easier to handle it as a (very weak) checksum.
|
|
SHA1 is not reasonably secure anymore, so we should not consider it
usable anymore. The test suite is adjusted to account for this.
|
|
We don't need the dependencies for obvious reasons and we don't need the
candidate version either, so building a pkgDepCache is wasted effort,
which we can stop doing now that build-dep cleared the path.
|
|
This doesn't allow all tests to run cleanly, but it at least allows to
write tests which could run successfully in such environments.
Git-Dch: Ignore
|
|
This allows running tests in parallel.
Git-Dch: Ignore
|
|
We want to declare some hashes as not enough for security, so that a
user will need --allow-unauthenticated or similar to get data secured
only by those hashes, but we can still us these hashes for integrity
checks if we got them.
|
|
The md5sum hash is broken since some time and we should no longer
consider it a usable hash. Also update the tests to reflect this.
|
|
Again, consistency is the main sellingpoint here, but this way it is now
also easier to explain that some files move through different stages and
lines are printed for them hence multiple times: That is a bit hard to
believe if the number is changing all the time, but now that it keeps
consistent.
|
|
It is a rather strange sight that index items use SiteOnly which strips
the Path, while e.g. deb files are downloaded with NoUserPassword which
does not. Important to note here is that for the file transport Path is
pretty important as there is no Host which would be displayed by Site,
which always resulted in "interesting" unspecific errors for "file:".
Adding a 'middle' ground between the two which does show the Path but
potentially modifies it (it strips a pending / at the end if existing)
solves this "file:" issue, syncs the output and in the end helps to
identify which file is meant exactly in progress output and co as a
single site can have multiple repositories in different paths.
|
|
Having every item having its own code to verify the file(s) it handles
is an errorprune process and easy to break, especially if items move
through various stages (download, uncompress, patching, …). With a giant
rework we centralize (most of) the verification to have a better
enforcement rate and (hopefully) less chance for bugs, but it breaks the
ABI bigtime in exchange – and as we break it anyway, it is broken even
harder.
It shouldn't effect most frontends as they don't deal with the acquire
system at all or implement their own items, but some do and will need to
be patched (might be an opportunity to use apt on-board material).
The theory is simple: Items implement methods to decide if hashes need to
be checked (in this stage) and to return the expected hashes for this
item (in this stage). The verification itself is done in worker message
passing which has the benefit that a hashsum error is now a proper error
for the acquire system rather than a Done() which is later revised to a
Failed().
|
|
We use test{success,failure} now all over the place in the framework, so
its only consequencial to do this in the situations in which we test for
a specific output as well.
Git-Dch: Ignore
|
|
partial files are chowned by the Item baseclass to let the methods work
with them. Now, this baseclass is also responsible for chowning the
files back to root instead of having various deeper levels do this.
The consequence is that all overloaded Failed() methods now call the
Item::Failed base as their first step. The same is done for Done().
The effect is that even in partial files usually don't belong to
_apt anymore, helping sneakernets and reducing possibilities of a bad
method modifying files not belonging to them.
The change is supported by the framework not only supporting being run
as root, but with proper permission management, too, so that privilege
dropping can be tested with them.
|
|
Now that methods have the expected hashes available they can check if
the response from the server is what they expected. Pipelining is one of
those areas in which servers can mess up by not supporting it properly,
which forced us to disable it for the time being. Now, we check if
we got a response out of order, which we can not only use to disable
pipelining automatically for the next requests, but we can fix it up
just like the server responded in proper order for the current requests.
To ensure that this little trick works pipelining is only attempt if we
have hashsums for all the files in the chain which in theory reduces the
use of pipelining usage even on the many servers which work properly,
but in practice only the InRelease file (or similar such) will be
requested without a hashsum – and as it is the only file requested in
that stage it can't be pipelined even if we wanted to.
Some minor annoyances remain: The display of the progress we have
doesn't reflect this change, so it looks like the same package gets
downloaded multiple times while others aren't at all. Further more,
partial files are not supported in this recovery as the received data
was appended to the wrong file, so the hashsum doesn't match.
Both seem to be minor enough to reenable pipelining by default until
further notice through to test if it really solves the problem.
This therefore reverts commit 8221431757c775ee875a061b184b5f6f2330f928.
|
|
Collect all hashes we can get from the source record and put them into a
HashStringList so that 'apt-get source' can use it instead of using
always the MD5sum.
We therefore also deprecate the MD5 struct member in favor of the list.
While at it, the parsing of the Files is enhanced so that records which
miss "Files" (aka MD5 checksums) are still searched for other checksums
as they include just as much data, just not with a nice and catchy name.
LP: 1098738
|
