View Issue Details
| ID | Project | Category | View Status | Date Submitted | Last Update |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0004019 | GNUnet | core service | public | 2015-10-22 22:06 | 2018-06-07 00:37 |
| Reporter | Bart Polot | Assigned To | Christian Grothoff | ||
| Priority | normal | Severity | minor | Reproducibility | always |
| Status | closed | Resolution | fixed | ||
| Product Version | Git master | ||||
| Target Version | 0.11.0 | Fixed in Version | 0.11.0pre66 | ||
| Summary | 0004019: CORE compains about mixed identities | ||||
| Description | CORE constantly compains about wrong PING/PONG identites: Oct 22 21:42:56-850664 core-27362 ERROR Received PING from `BART' for different identity: I am `VYGR', PONG identity: `RTAQ' Oct 22 21:42:56-850723 core-27362 WARNING External protocol violation detected at gnunet-service-core_kx.c:1077. [0000178:0000200 repetitions] Oct 22 22:01:34-875198 core-27362 ERROR Received PING from `BART' for different identity: I am `VYGR', PONG identity: `DZEN' Oct 22 22:01:34-875309 core-27362 WARNING External protocol violation detected at gnunet-service-core_kx.c:1077. | ||||
| Steps To Reproduce | Run a peer in the public network. | ||||
| Tags | No tags attached. | ||||
| related to | 0003863 | closed | Christian Grothoff | TRANSPORT (and indirectly CORE) takes unreasonably large amounts of time to call back. |
|
|
I see it, but only with BART and KPNK. Do we know what those two may have in common? |
|
|
Now, I don't see this anymore. Odd. |
|
|
BART is down, that's maybe why... |
|
|
Can you revive BART? |
|
|
Logging message changed in SVN 36609: now we log rekey operations (as they may explain the KX failure), and also only log the sender of the bogus PING, not the content which is irrelevant (as we failed to decrypt). |
|
|
Possibly related: I get these quite a lot, but only on pixel, not on gnunet9: Oct 28 10:19:21-103776 core-26665 ERROR Received EPHEMERAL_KEY from KHP1, but expected JHM1013RVC1T0BTB5VM1VNFBV0EM00V264JRE8S09584H7GHT4SG Oct 28 10:19:22-786130 core-26665 ERROR Received EPHEMERAL_KEY from KHP1, but expected JHM1013RVC1T0BTB5VM1VNFBV0EM00V264JRE8S09584H7GHT4SG Oct 28 10:19:43-421441 core-26665 ERROR Received EPHEMERAL_KEY from KHP1, but expected JHM1013RVC1T0BTB5VM1VNFBV0EM00V264JRE8S09584H7GHT4SG Oct 28 10:20:23-107805 core-26665 ERROR Received EPHEMERAL_KEY from KHP1, but expected JHM1013RVC1T0BTB5VM1VNFBV0EM00V264JRE8S09584H7GHT4SG Oct 28 10:21:43-067558 core-26665 ERROR Received EPHEMERAL_KEY from KHP1, but expected JHM1013RVC1T0BTB5VM1VNFBV0EM00V264JRE8S09584H7GHT4SG Oct 28 10:21:53-651507 core-26665 ERROR Received EPHEMERAL_KEY from 7SK8, but expected 7PJ8TAM7Q2EBSV0FT91RK1P1C2G5MRN3MVQ53HNHV9D45KGFV1DG Oct 28 10:24:22-190294 core-26665 ERROR Received EPHEMERAL_KEY from KHP1, but expected JHM1013RVC1T0BTB5VM1VNFBV0EM00V264JRE8S09584H7GHT4SG Oct 28 10:24:34-246332 core-26665 ERROR Received EPHEMERAL_KEY from XT25, but expected TQ2502VA31VBKRB2V09JSVRPAQH99GCHGGAMS3Q27692QM5E4VVG Oct 28 10:24:44-415154 core-26665 ERROR Received EPHEMERAL_KEY from XT25, but expected TQ2502VA31VBKRB2V09JSVRPAQH99GCHGGAMS3Q27692QM5E4VVG Oct 28 10:25:06-725381 core-26665 ERROR Received EPHEMERAL_KEY from XT25, but expected TQ2502VA31VBKRB2V09JSVRPAQH99GCHGGAMS3Q27692QM5E4VVG Oct 28 10:25:44-594928 core-26665 ERROR Received EPHEMERAL_KEY from XT25, but expected TQ2502VA31VBKRB2V09JSVRPAQH99GCHGGAMS3Q27692QM5E4VVG Oct 28 10:27:06-347836 core-26665 ERROR Received EPHEMERAL_KEY from XT25, but expected TQ2502VA31VBKRB2V09JSVRPAQH99GCHGGAMS3Q27692QM5E4VVG Oct 28 10:29:43-123996 core-26665 ERROR Received EPHEMERAL_KEY from KHP1, but expected JHM1013RVC1T0BTB5VM1VNFBV0EM00V264JRE8S09584H7GHT4SG Oct 28 10:29:45-420656 core-26665 ERROR Received EPHEMERAL_KEY from XT25, but expected TQ2502VA31VBKRB2V09JSVRPAQH99GCHGGAMS3Q27692QM5E4VVG Oct 28 10:35:04-314103 core-26665 ERROR Received EPHEMERAL_KEY from XT25, but expected TQ2502VA31VBKRB2V09JSVRPAQH99GCHGGAMS3Q27692QM5E4VVG |
|
|
Logs suggest this may be related to rekeying. Updated log message generated for malformed PINGs to consider if we just rekeyed. |
|
|
I've seen exactly this happen if two peers share the same private key due to bad setup (i.e. copy of VM image). Hence declaring 'fixed'. |
| Date Modified | Username | Field | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2015-10-22 22:06 | Bart Polot | New Issue | |
| 2015-10-22 22:06 | Bart Polot | Status | new => assigned |
| 2015-10-22 22:06 | Bart Polot | Assigned To | => Christian Grothoff |
| 2015-10-22 22:06 | Bart Polot | Relationship added | related to 0003863 |
| 2015-10-23 01:04 | Christian Grothoff | Note Added: 0009775 | |
| 2015-10-26 11:37 | Christian Grothoff | Priority | normal => high |
| 2015-10-26 16:21 | Christian Grothoff | Note Added: 0009790 | |
| 2015-10-26 20:24 | Bart Polot | Note Added: 0009798 | |
| 2015-10-27 15:31 | Christian Grothoff | Note Added: 0009810 | |
| 2015-10-28 11:28 | Christian Grothoff | Note Added: 0009812 | |
| 2015-10-28 14:09 | Christian Grothoff | Note Added: 0009820 | |
| 2015-10-29 11:01 | Christian Grothoff | Note Added: 0009828 | |
| 2015-10-31 16:16 | Christian Grothoff | Priority | high => normal |
| 2015-10-31 16:16 | Christian Grothoff | Target Version | 0.11.0pre66 => 0.11.0 |
| 2018-06-07 00:37 | Christian Grothoff | Status | assigned => closed |
| 2018-06-07 00:37 | Christian Grothoff | Resolution | open => fixed |
| 2018-06-07 00:37 | Christian Grothoff | Fixed in Version | => 0.11.0pre66 |
| 2018-06-07 00:37 | Christian Grothoff | Note Added: 0012987 |
