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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Exhaustive parsing checks #68

Open
darosior opened this issue Feb 27, 2021 · 4 comments
Open

Exhaustive parsing checks #68

darosior opened this issue Feb 27, 2021 · 4 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request good first issue Good for newcomers high prio

Comments

@darosior
Copy link
Member

Right now, we only sanity-check the PSBTs in from_psbt_serialized() are sane with regard to our internal assumptions (unwrap()s basically). This may be enough, but we may also want complete parsing checks to be sure that whether a transaction is parsed or created with the constructor it will hold to our requirements (eg, no dust amounts, sane feerate, etc..). This is quite some more hairy code though..
@darosior darosior added enhancement New feature or request question Further information is requested labels Feb 27, 2021
darosior added a commit to darosior/revault_tx that referenced this issue Mar 1, 2021
@darosior
transactions: sanity check Spend transaction feerate at startup
3f34980 
This also adds a cpfp_txout method to both clarify the code (at the
expense of performance) and allow downstream users to more accurately
compute fees.

Unfortunately this makes revault#68 even harder..

Signed-off-by: Antoine Poinsot <darosior@protonmail.com>
@darosior
Copy link
Member Author

darosior commented Mar 2, 2021

It includes checking the Miniscript s in the PSBT inputs too ...

darosior added a commit to darosior/revault_tx that referenced this issue Mar 2, 2021
@darosior
transactions: sanity check Spend transaction feerate at startup
188d61c 
This also adds a cpfp_txout method to both clarify the code (at the
expense of performance) and allow downstream users to more accurately
compute fees.

Unfortunately this makes revault#68 even harder..

Signed-off-by: Antoine Poinsot <darosior@protonmail.com>
darosior added a commit to darosior/revault_tx that referenced this issue Mar 3, 2021
@darosior
transactions: sanity check Spend transaction feerate at startup
181e555 
This also adds a cpfp_txout method to both clarify the code (at the
expense of performance) and allow downstream users to more accurately
compute fees.

Unfortunately this makes revault#68 even harder..

Signed-off-by: Antoine Poinsot <darosior@protonmail.com>
@darosior
Copy link
Member Author

darosior commented Mar 3, 2021

Part of this was implemented in #70 and #67

darosior added a commit to darosior/revault_tx that referenced this issue Apr 5, 2021
@darosior
transactions: sanity check Spend transaction feerate at startup
245cf3a 
This also adds a cpfp_txout method to both clarify the code (at the
expense of performance) and allow downstream users to more accurately
compute fees.

Unfortunately this makes revault#68 even harder..

Signed-off-by: Antoine Poinsot <darosior@protonmail.com>
@darosior
Copy link
Member Author

This would include checking for duplicated inputs (found by the fuzzer in the Cosigning Server) and all sort of insane transaction in general.

@darosior darosior added good first issue Good for newcomers high prio and removed question Further information is requested labels Apr 28, 2021
@darosior
Copy link
Member Author

darosior commented Jul 9, 2021

We need to refuse insane amounts as well, working on it.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
enhancement New feature or request good first issue Good for newcomers high prio
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
1 participant
@darosior