CodeChain-io / CodeChain-io/codechain

OnChain invalid timestamp block propagation fail

Đang mở
#808 1 bình luận 0 reaction 0 người được giao Xem trên GitHub
bug test
Ngôn ngữ chính
Rust
Star
256
Fork
50
Chỉ số merge pull request
Không có pull request nào được merge trong 30 ngày

Mô tả

There are some issues in sending invalid timestamp onChain blocks.
---
Below is a test scenario.
1. Make block1 and block2.
2. The timestamp in Block2's header should be invalid. Simply make it smaller than block1.
2. Send a `status message` with block2's hash as the bestHash.
3. Send a `header response message` which is [genesisHeader, block1Header, block2Header].
4. Send a `body response message` == [[], []], which is correspond to block1's body and block2's body.
5. Block is accepted from the target node only for block1. So the target node should send a status message with block1's hash as bestHash.(This is normal behaviour but it didn't)
---
And here are problems
1. The target node does not send `status message` if in the above situation. However, if I inserted `info!("55");` then the `status message` come properly.
2. In below `verify()` function in `/core/verification/queue/mod.rs`, `Ok(verified)` is returned twice although the block2 is invalid.
```rust

fn verify(
verification: Arc>,
engine: Arc,
ready_signal: Arc,
empty: Arc,
more_to_verify: Arc,
_id: usize,
) {
loop {
// wait for work if empty.
{
let mut more_to_verify_mutex = verification.more_to_verify_mutex.lock().unwrap();

if verification.unverified.lock().is_empty() && verification.verifying.lock().is_empty() {
empty.notify_all();
}

while verification.unverified.lock().is_empty() {
more_to_verify_mutex = more_to_verify.wait(more_to_verify_mutex).unwrap();
}
}

// do work.
let item = {
// acquire these locks before getting the item to verify.
let mut unverified = verification.unverified.lock();
let mut verifying = verification.verifying.lock();

let item = match unverified.pop_front() {
Some(item) => item,
None => continue,
};

verification.sizes.unverified.fetch_sub(item.heap_size_of_children(), AtomicOrdering::SeqCst);
verifying.push_back(Verifying {
hash: item.hash(),
output: None,
});
item
};

let hash = item.hash();
let is_ready = match K::verify(item, &*engine, verification.check_seal) {
Ok(verified) => {
let mut verifying = verification.verifying.lock();
let mut idx = None;
for (i, e) in verifying.iter_mut().enumerate() {
if e.hash == hash {
idx = Some(i);

verification
.sizes
.verifying
.fetch_add(verified.heap_size_of_children(), AtomicOrdering::SeqCst);
e.output = Some(verified);
break
}
}

if idx == Some(0) {
// we're next!
let mut verified = verification.verified.lock();
let mut bad = verification.bad.lock();
VerificationQueue::drain_verifying(
&mut verifying,
&mut verified,
&mut bad,
&verification.sizes,
);
info!("111");
true
} else {
info!("222");
false
}
}
Err(_) => {
let mut verifying = verification.verifying.lock();
let mut verified = verification.verified.lock();
let mut bad = verification.bad.lock();

bad.insert(hash.clone());
verifying.retain(|e| e.hash != hash);

if verifying.front().map_or(false, |x| x.output.is_some()) {
VerificationQueue::drain_verifying(
&mut verifying,
&mut verified,
&mut bad,
&verification.sizes,
);
info!("33");
true
} else {
info!("44");
false
}
}
};
if is_ready {
info!("55");
// Import the block immediately
ready_signal.set_sync();
}
}
}
```

Hướng dẫn đóng góp

Mở hướng dẫn đóng góp

Đánh giá

Issue này chưa được đánh giá.

Nhận issue mới trong hộp thư của bạn

Bản tóm tắt ngắn những issue GitHub phù hợp với người mới.