/* Fall through. */
case GUARD_CIRC_STATE_USABLE_IF_NO_BETTER_GUARD:
if (guard->is_primary) {
- /* XXXX prop271 -- I don't actually like this logic. It seems to make
+ /* XXXX #20832 -- I don't actually like this logic. It seems to make
* us a little more susceptible to evil-ISP attacks. The mitigations
* I'm thinking of, however, aren't local to this point, so I'll leave
* it alone. */
int
entry_list_is_constrained(const or_options_t *options)
{
- // XXXX prop271 look at the current selection.
+ // XXXX #21425 look at the current selection.
if (options->EntryNodes)
return 1;
if (options->UseBridges)
{
int n_options = 0;
- /* XXXX prop271 Is this quite right? */
tor_assert(get_options()->UseBridges);
guard_selection_t *gs = get_guard_selection_info();
tor_assert(gs->type == GS_TYPE_BRIDGE);
if (r1 < 0) {
if (msg && *msg == NULL) {
- *msg = tor_strdup("parsing error"); //xxxx prop271 should we try harder?
+ *msg = tor_strdup("parsing error")
}
return -1;
}
tor_free(old_name);
}
-/** Remove all currently listed entry guards. So new ones will be chosen. */
+/** Remove all currently listed entry guards, so new ones will be chosen.
+ *
+ * XXXX This function shouldn't exist -- it's meant to support the DROPGUARDS
+ * command, which is deprecated.
+ */
void
remove_all_entry_guards(void)
{
- // XXXX prop271 this function shouldn't exist, in the new order.
- // This function shouldn't exist.
remove_all_entry_guards_for_guard_selection(get_guard_selection_info());
}