mirror of
https://github.com/tahoe-lafs/tahoe-lafs.git
synced 2024-12-20 05:28:04 +00:00
260 lines
11 KiB
Plaintext
260 lines
11 KiB
Plaintext
= Known Issues =
|
|
|
|
Below is a list of known issues in recent releases of allmydata.org
|
|
Tahoe, the Least-Authority Filesystem, and how to manage them. The
|
|
current version of this file can be found at
|
|
|
|
http://allmydata.org/source/tahoe/trunk/docs/known_issues.txt
|
|
|
|
|
|
== issues in Tahoe v1.2.0, released 2008-06-21 ==
|
|
|
|
=== issue 10: command-line arguments are leaked to other processes ===
|
|
|
|
Remember that command-line arguments are visible to other users
|
|
(through the 'ps' command, or the windows Process Explorer tool), so
|
|
if you are using a Tahoe node on a shared host, other users on that
|
|
host will be able to see (and capture) any directory caps that you set
|
|
up with the "tahoe add-alias" command.
|
|
|
|
==== how to manage it ====
|
|
|
|
Bypass add-alias and edit the NODEDIR/private/aliases file directly,
|
|
by adding a line like this:
|
|
|
|
fun: URI:DIR2:ovjy4yhylqlfoqg2vcze36dhde:4d4f47qko2xm5g7osgo2yyidi5m4muyo2vjjy53q4vjju2u55mfa
|
|
|
|
By entering the dircap through the editor, the command-line arguments are
|
|
bypassed, and other users will not be able to see them. Once you've added the
|
|
alias, no other secrets are passed through the command line, so this
|
|
vulnerability becomes less significant: they can still see your filenames and
|
|
other arguments you type there, but not the caps that Tahoe uses to permit
|
|
access to your files and directories.
|
|
|
|
|
|
== issues in Tahoe v1.1.0, released 2008-06-11 ==
|
|
|
|
=== issue 9: more than one file can match an immutable file cap ===
|
|
|
|
In Tahoe v1.0 and v1.1.0, a flaw in the cryptographic integrity check
|
|
makes it possible for the original uploader of an immutable file to
|
|
produce more than one immutable file matching the same capability, so
|
|
that different downloads using the same capability could result in
|
|
different files. This flaw can be exploited only by the original
|
|
uploader of an immutable file, which means that it is not a severe
|
|
vulnerability: you can still rely on the integrity check to make sure
|
|
that the file you download with a given capability is a file that the
|
|
original uploader intended. The only issue is that you can't assume
|
|
that every time you use the same capability to download a file you'll
|
|
get the same file.
|
|
|
|
==== how to manage it ====
|
|
|
|
This was fixed in Tahoe v1.2.0, released 2008-07-21, under ticket
|
|
#491. Upgrade to that release of Tahoe and then you can rely on the
|
|
property that there is only one file that you can download using a
|
|
given capability. If you are still using Tahoe v1.0.0 or v1.1.0, then
|
|
remember that the original uploader could produce multiple files that
|
|
match the same capability, so for example if someone gives you a
|
|
capability, and you use it to download a file, and you give that
|
|
capability to your friend, and he uses it to download a file, you and
|
|
your friend could get different files.
|
|
|
|
|
|
=== issue 8: server out of space when writing mutable file ===
|
|
|
|
If a v1.0 or v1.1.0 storage server runs out of disk space or is
|
|
otherwise unable to write to its local filesystem, then problems can
|
|
ensue. For immutable files, this will not lead to any problem (the
|
|
attempt to upload that share to that server will fail, the partially
|
|
uploaded share will be deleted from the storage server's "incoming
|
|
shares" directory, and the client will move on to using another
|
|
storage server instead).
|
|
|
|
If the write was an attempt to modify an existing mutable file,
|
|
however, a problem will result: when the attempt to write the new
|
|
share fails (e.g. due to insufficient disk space), then it will be
|
|
aborted and the old share will be left in place. If enough such old
|
|
shares are left, then a subsequent read may get those old shares and
|
|
see the file in its earlier state, which is a "rollback" failure.
|
|
With the default parameters (3-of-10), six old shares will be enough
|
|
to potentially lead to a rollback failure.
|
|
|
|
==== how to manage it ====
|
|
|
|
Make sure your Tahoe storage servers don't run out of disk space.
|
|
This means refusing storage requests before the disk fills up. There
|
|
are a couple of ways to do that with v1.1.
|
|
|
|
First, there is a configuration option named "sizelimit" which will
|
|
cause the storage server to do a "du" style recursive examination of
|
|
its directories at startup, and then if the sum of the size of files
|
|
found therein is greater than the "sizelimit" number, it will reject
|
|
requests by clients to write new immutable shares.
|
|
|
|
However, that can take a long time (something on the order of a minute
|
|
of examination of the filesystem for each 10 GB of data stored in the
|
|
Tahoe server), and the Tahoe server will be unavailable to clients
|
|
during that time.
|
|
|
|
Another option is to set the "readonly_storage" configuration option
|
|
on the storage server before startup. This will cause the storage
|
|
server to reject all requests to upload new immutable shares.
|
|
|
|
Note that neither of these configurations affect mutable shares: even
|
|
if sizelimit is configured and the storage server currently has
|
|
greater space used than allowed, or even if readonly_storage is
|
|
configured, servers will continue to accept new mutable shares and
|
|
will continue to accept requests to overwrite existing mutable shares.
|
|
|
|
Mutable files are typically used only for directories, and are usually
|
|
much smaller than immutable files, so if you use one of these
|
|
configurations to stop the influx of immutable files while there is
|
|
still sufficient disk space to receive an influx of (much smaller)
|
|
mutable files, you may be able to avoid the potential for "rollback"
|
|
failure.
|
|
|
|
A future version of Tahoe will include a fix for this issue. Here is
|
|
[http://allmydata.org/pipermail/tahoe-dev/2008-May/000630.html the
|
|
mailing list discussion] about how that future version will work.
|
|
|
|
|
|
=== issue 7: pyOpenSSL/Twisted defect causes false alarms in tests ===
|
|
|
|
The combination of Twisted v8 and pyOpenSSL v0.7 causes the Tahoe v1.1
|
|
unit tests to fail, even though the behavior of Tahoe itself which is
|
|
being tested is correct.
|
|
|
|
==== how to manage it ====
|
|
|
|
If you are using Twisted v8 and pyOpenSSL v0.7, then please ignore
|
|
ERROR "Reactor was unclean" in test_system and test_introducer.
|
|
Downgrading to an older version of Twisted or pyOpenSSL will cause
|
|
those false alarms to stop happening.
|
|
|
|
|
|
== issues in Tahoe v1.0.0, released 2008-03-25 ==
|
|
|
|
(Tahoe v1.0 was superceded by v1.1 which was released 2008-06-11.)
|
|
|
|
=== issue 6: server out of space when writing mutable file ===
|
|
|
|
In addition to the problems caused by insufficient disk space
|
|
described above, v1.0 clients which are writing mutable files when the
|
|
servers fail to write to their filesystem are likely to think the
|
|
write succeeded, when it in fact failed. This can cause data loss.
|
|
|
|
==== how to manage it ====
|
|
|
|
Upgrade client to v1.1, or make sure that servers are always able to
|
|
write to their local filesystem (including that there is space
|
|
available) as described in "issue 1" above.
|
|
|
|
|
|
=== issue 5: server out of space when writing immutable file ===
|
|
|
|
Tahoe v1.0 clients are using v1.0 servers which are unable to write to
|
|
their filesystem during an immutable upload will correctly detect the
|
|
first failure, but if they retry the upload without restarting the
|
|
client, or if another client attempts to upload the same file, the
|
|
second upload may appear to succeed when it hasn't, which can lead to
|
|
data loss.
|
|
|
|
==== how to manage it ====
|
|
|
|
Upgrading either or both of the client and the server to v1.1 will fix
|
|
this issue. Also it can be avoided by ensuring that the servers are
|
|
always able to write to their local filesystem (including that there
|
|
is space available) as described in "issue 1" above.
|
|
|
|
|
|
=== issue 4: large directories or mutable files of certain sizes ===
|
|
|
|
If a client attempts to upload a large mutable file with a size
|
|
greater than about 3,139,000 and less than or equal to 3,500,000 bytes
|
|
then it will fail but appear to succeed, which can lead to data loss.
|
|
|
|
(Mutable files larger than 3,500,000 are refused outright). The
|
|
symptom of the failure is very high memory usage (3 GB of memory) and
|
|
100% CPU for about 5 minutes, before it appears to succeed, although
|
|
it hasn't.
|
|
|
|
Directories are stored in mutable files, and a directory of
|
|
approximately 9000 entries may fall into this range of mutable file
|
|
sizes (depending on the size of the filenames or other metadata
|
|
associated with the entries).
|
|
|
|
==== how to manage it ====
|
|
|
|
This was fixed in v1.1, under ticket #379. If the client is upgraded
|
|
to v1.1, then it will fail cleanly instead of falsely appearing to
|
|
succeed when it tries to write a file whose size is in this range. If
|
|
the server is also upgraded to v1.1, then writes of mutable files
|
|
whose size is in this range will succeed. (If the server is upgraded
|
|
to v1.1 but the client is still v1.0 then the client will still suffer
|
|
this failure.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
=== issue 3: uploading files greater than 12 GiB ===
|
|
|
|
If a Tahoe v1.0 client uploads a file greater than 12 GiB in size, the file will
|
|
be silently corrupted so that it is not retrievable, but the client will think
|
|
that it succeeded. This is a "data loss" failure.
|
|
|
|
==== how to manage it ====
|
|
|
|
Don't upload files larger than 12 GiB. If you have previously uploaded files of
|
|
that size, assume that they have been corrupted and are not retrievable from the
|
|
Tahoe storage grid. Tahoe v1.1 clients will refuse to upload files larger than
|
|
12 GiB with a clean failure. A future release of Tahoe will remove this
|
|
limitation so that larger files can be uploaded.
|
|
|
|
|
|
=== issue 2: pycryptopp defect resulting in data corruption ===
|
|
|
|
Versions of pycryptopp earlier than pycryptopp-0.5.0 had a defect
|
|
which, when compiled with some compilers, would cause AES-256
|
|
encryption and decryption to be computed incorrectly. This could
|
|
cause data corruption. Tahoe v1.0 required, and came with a bundled
|
|
copy of, pycryptopp v0.3.
|
|
|
|
==== how to manage it ====
|
|
|
|
You can detect whether pycryptopp-0.3 has this failure when it is
|
|
compiled by your compiler. Run the unit tests that come with
|
|
pycryptopp-0.3: unpack the "pycryptopp-0.3.tar" file that comes in the
|
|
Tahoe v1.0 {{{misc/dependencies}}} directory, cd into the resulting
|
|
{{{pycryptopp-0.3.0}}} directory, and execute {{{python ./setup.py
|
|
test}}}. If the tests pass, then your compiler does not trigger this
|
|
failure.
|
|
|
|
|
|
=== issue 1: potential disclosure of a file through embedded
|
|
hyperlinks or JavaScript in that file ===
|
|
|
|
If there is a file stored on a Tahoe storage grid, and that file gets
|
|
downloaded and displayed in a web browser, then JavaScript or
|
|
hyperlinks within that file can leak the capability to that file to a
|
|
third party, which means that third party gets access to the file.
|
|
|
|
If there is JavaScript in the file, then it could deliberately leak
|
|
the capability to the file out to some remote listener.
|
|
|
|
If there are hyperlinks in the file, and they get followed, then
|
|
whichever server they point to receives the capability to the
|
|
file. Note that IMG tags are typically followed automatically by web
|
|
browsers, so being careful which hyperlinks you click on is not
|
|
sufficient to prevent this from happening.
|
|
|
|
==== how to manage it ====
|
|
|
|
For future versions of Tahoe, we are considering ways to close off
|
|
this leakage of authority while preserving ease of use -- the
|
|
discussion of this issue is ticket #127.
|
|
|
|
For the present, a good work-around is that if you want to store and
|
|
view a file on Tahoe and you want that file to remain private, then
|
|
remove from that file any hyperlinks pointing to other people's
|
|
servers and remove any JavaScript unless you are sure that the
|
|
JavaScript is not written to maliciously leak access.
|