#18342: Provide more accurate reverse DNS results -----------------------------+-------------------------- Reporter: cypherpunks | Owner: irl Type: defect | Status: accepted Priority: Medium | Milestone: Component: Metrics/Onionoo | Version: Severity: Normal | Resolution: Keywords: metrics-2018 | Actual Points: Parent ID: | Points: Reviewer: | Sponsor: -----------------------------+--------------------------
Comment (by irl): The DNS specification does not actually prohibit the presence of multiple PTR records. ): This means it can be perfectly valid for an IP address to have multiple reverse names which could all be validated using forward names successfully. I have found at least 3 relays that have more than one PTR record that validate with a forward record. Alternative proposal: * For `host_name` we implement the spec as it is (actually omitting the field instead of returning IP addresses), but also deprecate the field. * Add a new `verified_host_names` field with an **array** of strings, this will include the DNS PTR record's names. It would be updated at the same time as the host_name record. Omitted if the host name was verified by looking up an A record, or if no PTR record was found. * Add a new `unverified_host_names` field with an **array** of strings, this will include the DNS PTR record's names. It would be updated at the same time as the host_name record. Omitted if the host name was verified by looking up an A record, or if no PTR record was found. It would be possible to have either, both, or neither verified and unverified host names for each relay. -- Ticket URL: <https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/18342#comment:18> Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki <https://trac.torproject.org/> The Tor Project: anonymity online
_______________________________________________ tor-bugs mailing list tor-bugs@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-bugs