Bump misbehaving factor for unexpected version message behavior

Summary:
The net protocol expects that the version-verack handshake
is complete before other messages are sent.  There's no reason to
allow 100 out-of-order messages to come from a single peer before
deciding to ban them. This behavior should be treated more suspiciously
and ban the peer after one order of magnitude fewer messages.

To assess the impact of this patch, I examined mainnet logs spanning the last 4 months.
There were only 13 instances of `missing-verack` and none of `missing-version`.
All instances were received from unique peers.  Given this data, I think it's safe to assume
we will not see 10+ `missing-(version|verack)` instances from any currently deployed nodes
that would otherwise not be banned prior to this patch.

Test Plan:
```
ninja check check-functional
```

Reviewers: #bitcoin_abc, deadalnix

Reviewed By: #bitcoin_abc, deadalnix

Differential Revision: https://reviews.bitcoinabc.org/D6036

src/net_processing.cpp

@@ -2296,7 +2296,7 @@ static bool ProcessMessage(const Config &config, CNode *pfrom,
     if (pfrom->nVersion == 0) {
         // Must have a version message before anything else
         LOCK(cs_main);
-        Misbehaving(pfrom, 1, "missing-version");
+        Misbehaving(pfrom, 10, "missing-version");
         return false;
     }
 
@@ -2345,7 +2345,7 @@ static bool ProcessMessage(const Config &config, CNode *pfrom,
     if (!pfrom->fSuccessfullyConnected) {
         // Must have a verack message before anything else
         LOCK(cs_main);
-        Misbehaving(pfrom, 1, "missing-verack");
+        Misbehaving(pfrom, 10, "missing-verack");
         return false;
     }