Joystream / Joystream/joystream
Leader storage state protection
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Rust
- Stars
- 1.4k
- Forks
- 116
- PR merge metrics
- No merged PRs in 30d
Description
I think we need a careful examination of how well we are protecting storage state from abuse from leads, this means both in working group module, but more importantly, also in the different subsystem modules. I suspect there are attacks vectors here, and simply relying, or hoping to rely on, stake is not ideal if avoidable without substantial inconvenience.
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start by examining the working group module and then the different subsystem modules for how leader-controlled storage state is validated and protected. Identify concrete abuse or attack vectors and document the affected flows before proposing changes. Done means the relevant storage-state protections are understood and any avoidable leader abuse paths are addressed without substantial inconvenience.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- rust
- Domain
- blockchain, security
- Issue type
- Bug
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 18/100