Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fix invalid data column sidecars getting accepted #6454

Merged

Conversation

jimmygchen
Copy link
Member

Issue Addressed

Addresses #6440.

Data columns with empty cells were accepted because it's possible to generate a valid proof for an empty kzg_commiments list, therefore the invalid data columns was accepted and broke denvet-2 as clients react differently to this.

This PR adds an additional validation for kzg commitment size.

@jimmygchen jimmygchen changed the title Fix invalid data column sidecars getting accepted. Fix invalid data column sidecars getting accepted Oct 2, 2024
@jimmygchen jimmygchen added bug Something isn't working ready-for-review The code is ready for review das Data Availability Sampling labels Oct 2, 2024
jimmygchen added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 2, 2024
Squashed commit of the following:

commit c935cc2
Author: Jimmy Chen <[email protected]>
Date:   Wed Oct 2 16:10:48 2024 +1000

    Fix invalid data column sidecars getting accepted.
Copy link
Member

@pawanjay176 pawanjay176 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM.
Should we update the spec to explicitly not allow for sidecars with empty elements?

Edit: There's already a spec PR ethereum/consensus-specs#3953 . Maybe we duplicate the spec function in our code too to be consistent with the rest of the checks @jimmygchen ?

@jimmygchen
Copy link
Member Author

LGTM. Should we update the spec to explicitly not allow for sidecars with empty elements?

Edit: There's already a spec PR ethereum/consensus-specs#3953 . Maybe we duplicate the spec function in our code too to be consistent with the rest of the checks @jimmygchen ?

Yep good idea, done!

Copy link
Member

@pawanjay176 pawanjay176 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Nice

@jimmygchen jimmygchen added the ready-for-merge This PR is ready to merge. label Oct 3, 2024
@jimmygchen
Copy link
Member Author

@mergify queue

Copy link

mergify bot commented Oct 3, 2024

queue

✅ The pull request has been merged automatically

The pull request has been merged automatically at 17849b5

mergify bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 3, 2024
@mergify mergify bot merged commit 17849b5 into sigp:unstable Oct 3, 2024
28 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working das Data Availability Sampling ready-for-merge This PR is ready to merge. ready-for-review The code is ready for review
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants