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

single_validator_resign_block.json: Issue in minimal slashing DB? #19

Open
nalepae opened this issue Dec 7, 2023 · 1 comment
Open

Comments

@nalepae
Copy link

nalepae commented Dec 7, 2023

EIP-3076 states:

  1. Refuse to sign any block with slot <= min(b.slot for b in data.signed_blocks if b.pubkey == proposer_pubkey), except if it is a repeat signing as determined by the signing_root.

In test single_validator_resign_block.json, for block proposals for pubkey 0xa99a..., we have in the interchange file:

Slot                    15 ----> 16 -----> 17
Signing root            97       a1        ab

The minimal anti-slashing DB retains only the proposal with the highest slot:

  • Slot: 17
  • Signing root: ab

Later, in steps[0].blocks[3], we want to import:

        {
          "pubkey": "0xa99a76ed7796f7be22d5b7e85deeb7c5677e88e511e0b337618f8c4eb61349b4bf2d153f649f7b53359fe8b94a38e44c",
          "slot": "17",
          "signing_root": "0x00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000ab",
          "should_succeed": false,
          "should_succeed_complete": true
        },

We try to import a block, corresponding to the minimal proposed slot for this pubkey (which is actually the maximum one as well if consider a minimal anti-slashing DB), with the same signing_root.
==> This import should be both valid for minimal anti-slashing DB (should_succeed) as well as for complete anti-slashing DB (should_succeed_complete)

@michaelsproul
Copy link
Collaborator

I suspect this has the same root cause as #20. Ambiguity about whether a minimal impl remembers the signing root or not

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants