Tails

#1 Updated by intrigeri 2019-06-07 10:58:48

• blocks Feature #16209: Core work: Foundations Team added

#2 Updated by intrigeri 2019-06-07 10:58:56

• related to Bug #16148: ICMPv6 leaks detected by test suite added

#3 Updated by anonym 2019-06-11 11:51:07

• Status changed from Confirmed to In Progress

Applied in changeset commit:tails|86bd6d5db9284e6204192dae2f7cae1ddaf20df2.

#4 Updated by anonym 2019-06-11 11:56:11

• % Done changed from 0 to 40
• Feature Branch set to test/16788-fix-pcap-analysis

intrigeri wrote:
> anonym, I had never seen it before, could this be related to the recent merge of feature/16148-unfiltered-pcaps?

Yup. Since we started including all traffic, including the router’s, in Bug #16148 I only adapted pcap_connections_helper() but didn’t think about this check. It’s an easy fix!

I’ve grepped for pcap and couldn’t find any other code that needs adaptation, so we should be good now. Jenkins?

#5 Updated by anonym 2019-06-13 07:50:41

• Status changed from In Progress to Needs Validation
• Assignee deleted (anonym)
• % Done changed from 40 to 50

The two DHCP scenarios that are failing very often on all branches are passing again! Let’s get this merged!

#6 Updated by intrigeri 2019-06-14 08:53:45

• Assignee set to intrigeri

#7 Updated by intrigeri 2019-06-14 08:59:30

• Status changed from Needs Validation to In Progress
• Assignee changed from intrigeri to anonym

The reasoning behind this fix implicitly trusts that the system under test behaves as expected (“DHCP only uses IP packets”) and then we ignore unexpected behavior. Assuming that a cleaner fix (e.g. ignoring only ARP from the router) is non-trivial, OK, fine, let’s do this, but then please explain the reasoning and trade-off in a comment, not just in the commit message: otherwise, next time I’ll read this code, I’ll be like “uh, seriously?!” :)

#8 Updated by anonym 2019-06-14 12:55:43

• Status changed from In Progress to Needs Validation
• Assignee changed from anonym to intrigeri
• % Done changed from 50 to 60

intrigeri wrote:
> The reasoning behind this fix implicitly trusts that the system under test behaves as expected (“DHCP only uses IP packets”) and then we ignore unexpected behavior.

I see your point. In practice we are not really testing DHCP only, since there’ a full system running (hence the unrelated ARP requests), so I think what you propose is likely to cause robustness issues in general, but since this step will only be used in this precise situation (where ARP is the only unrelated thing that can reasonably be expected, AFAICT) I think it is fine, so I pushed something I think you’ll like more.

#9 Updated by intrigeri 2019-06-14 13:44:41

• Assignee changed from intrigeri to anonym

> I pushed something I think you’ll like more.

Indeed, I like it a lot! Feel free to merge yourself once Jenkins is happy :)

#10 Updated by anonym 2019-06-17 07:46:11

• Status changed from Needs Validation to Fix committed
• Assignee deleted (anonym)
• % Done changed from 60 to 100

#11 Updated by intrigeri 2019-06-19 07:58:59

• related to Bug #16825: "Found something that is not an ethernet packet" intermittent test failure added

#12 Updated by intrigeri 2019-07-03 08:13:10

• Status changed from Fix committed to Resolved
• Target version changed from Tails_3.15 to Tails_3.14.1

#13 Updated by intrigeri 2019-09-29 12:39:52

• related to Bug #17102: "Found something that is not an ethernet packet" intermittent test failure added