* Security: stop gossiping failure and attempt times as last_seen times
Previously, Zebra had a single time field for peer addresses, which was
updated every time a peer was attempted, sent a message, or failed.
This is a security issue, because the `last_seen` time should be
"the last time [a peer] connected to that node", so that
"nodes can use the time field to avoid relaying old 'addr' messages".
So Zebra was sending incorrect peer information to other nodes.
As part of this change, we split the `last_seen` time into the
following fields:
- untrusted_last_seen: gossiped from other peers
- last_response: time we got a response from a directly connected peer
- last_attempt: time we attempted to connect to a peer
- last_failure: time a connection with a peer failed
* Implement Arbitrary and strategies for MetaAddrChange
Also replace the MetaAddr Arbitrary impl with a derive.
* Write proptests for MetaAddr and MetaAddrChange
MetaAddr:
- the only times that get included in serialized MetaAddrs are
the untrusted last seen and responded times
MetaAddrChange:
- the untrusted last seen time is never updated
- the services are only updated if there has been a handshake
When peers ask for peer addresses, add our local listener address to the
set of addresses, sanitize, then truncate. Sanitize shuffles addresses,
so if there are lots of addresses in the address book, our address will
only be sent to some peers.
Previously, the TimestampCollector was intended to own the address book
data, so it was intended to be cloneable and hold shared state among all
of its handles. This is now modeled more directly by an
`Arc<Mutex<AddressBook>>`, so the only functionality left in the
`TimestampCollector` is setting up the inital worker, which is better
called `spawn` than `new`.
This also fixes a problem introduced in the previous commit where the
`TimestampCollector` was dropped, causing the worker task to shut down
early.
This allows us to hide the `TimestampCollector` and to expose only the
address book data required by the inbound request service. It also lets
us have a common data structure (the `AddressBook`) for collecting peer
information that can be used to manage information that other peers
report to us.
Add a tower-based peer implementation.
Tower provides middleware for request-response oriented protocols, while Bitcoin/Zcash just send messages which could be interpreted either as requests or responses, depending on context. To bridge this mismatch we define our own internal request/response protocol, and implement a per-peer event loop that scans incoming messages and interprets them either as requests from the remote peer to our node, or as responses to requests we made previously. This is performed by the `PeerService` task, and a corresponding `PeerClient: tower::Service` can send it requests. These tasks are themselves created by a `PeerConnector: tower::Service` which dials a remote peer and performs a handshake.
teor
Henry de Valence